
PRESENTED BY 



THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



A 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION 



TO 



THE SACRED SCRIPTURES; 

IN A SERIES OF DISSERTATIONS, 



BY THE MOST REV. JOSEPH DIXON, D.D., 

FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF SACRED SCRIPTURE AND HEBREW IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF 
ST. PATRICK, MAYNOOTH. 



".Ego ipso qui loquebar." — Isaiae, lii, 6. 



DUBLIN : 

JAMES DUFFY, SONS, and COMPANY, 

15, WELLINGTON QUAY; 
LONDON: 1a, PATERNOSTER-ROW. 

1875. 



GIFT 

FATHER G. RYAN 
AUG- 2Q : 1940 



DUBLIN" : 

Iprmteb bt> §am*s Ulcere, 
2, Crampton-quay. 



CONTENTS. 



DISSERTATION I. 

Page. 

On the Canon of Scripture, . . . . .1 

Chapter I — Preliminary Observations — State of the question, ib. 

Chapter II Nature and extent of Inspiration, . . .3 

Chapter III How is the inspiration of the Scriptures proved, . 6 

Chapter IV What are called the deuterocanonical portions of 

the Old Testament are properly placed on the 
Canon of Scripture, and are of equal authority 
with the protocanonical parts of the Canon, . 19 

Chapter V Reply to the objections of Protestants against our 

Canon, . . . . .23 

DISSERTATION II. 



Historical notice of the form of the Sacred Books, . . .34 

Section — Of the Divisions and Marks of Distinction occurring in 

the Scripture, . . . . .40 

DISSERTATION III. 
On the present state of the original texts of the Sacred Scripture, . 47 

DISSERTATION IV. 

Of the Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible, . . . .52 

Section. — On the antiquity of the Hebrew Yowel Points, . 54 

DISSERTATION Y. 
Of the principal printed Editions of the Hebrew Bible, . .60 

DISSERTATION VI. 
Of the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament, . .65 

DISSERTATION VII. 
Of the printed Editions of the Greek Testament, . . .72 

DISSERTATION VIII. 

Of the Ancient Versions of the Sacred Scriptures, . . .80 

Chapter I.— Of the Targums, or Chaldaic Paraphrases, . ib. 
Chapter II. — Of the Samaritan Pentateuch, . . .84 

And of the Samaritan Version of the Pentateuch, 86 



VI 



CONTENTS. 



Page 

Chapter III. — Of the Septuagint Version, . . .90 

Chapter IV. — Of the other Ancient Greek Versions, . .102 
Chapter V. — Of the Latin Vulgate, . . . .105 

Chapter VI — Of the Syriac Versions of the Scriptures, . 117 

Chapter VII. — Of the Egyptian Versions, . . .121 

Chapter VIII — Of the Arabic Versions — the Ethiopian Version — 

the Persian Versions— and the Armenian Version, 123 
Chapter IX Of the Gothic and Sclavonic Versions, . .127 



DISSERTATION IX. 

Of the Principal Modern Versions of the Sacred Scripture, 
Chapter 
Chapter 
Chapter 
Chapter 



Chapter 



I Of the Modern Latin Versions, 

II. — Of the English Versions, . . . 

III. — Of the German and French Versions, 

IV. — Of the Belgian, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese 

Versions, . . 

V. — Of the Polish, Bohemian, Sclavonic, Icelandic, and 
other modern Versions, .... 



129 
ib. 
132 
141 

145 

147 



DISSERTATION X. 
Of the reading of the Scriptures in the Vulgar Tongue, 



149 



DISSERTATION XI. 



Of Biblical Criticism, 
Example, 



1"0 
180 



DISSERTATION XII. 



Of Biblical Hermeneutics, . . . . . .182 

Chapter I. — Statement and division of the Subject. — History 

of Biblical Hermeneutics, . . ib. 

Chapter II. — Of the various Senses of Scripture, . . 188 

Chapter III. — Of the Hermeneutical Criteria of the Literal 

Sense of Scripture, . . . .195 

Chapter IV Of the Dogmatical Laws of Interpretation, . 214 

Chapter V Criteria of the Mystical Sense On Facts or 

Actions of a Symbolical character that are re- 
lated in Scripture, .... 220 
Chapter VI. — Of the New Exegesis, or the Rationalistic 

Systems of Hermeneutics, . . .222 

Chapter VII. — Some observations upon the foregoing chapter 

Of the System of Hermeneutics taught in the 
New Testament, . * . .227 

Chapter VIII. — On the manner of setting forth to others the sense 

of the Scripture, . . . .236 

Example. — The Division of the Commandments, 241 



DISSERTATION XIII. 

Of the Historical Geography of the Holy Land ; and of the princi- 
eonntries about it of which mention is made in the Scripture, , 



24,9- 



CONTENTS. vii 

DISSERTATION XIV. 

Pa.iro 

On the Physical Geography of the Holy Land, . . 276 

Section I Mountains, ..... ib. 

Section II. — Plains and Valleys of the Holy Land, . .27 s 

Section III Deserts and Forests, .... 280 

Section IV — Lakes and Rivers, . . . .281 

Section V Temperature of the Holy Land, . . . 285 

Section VI — Fertility of the soil of the Holy Land, . 287 

Section VII — Calamities to which the Holy Land was liable, . 289 

, DISSERTATION XV. 

On the political Antiquities of the Jews, . . .293 
Chapter I. — Of the ancient Government of the Hebrews, . ib 
Chapter II. — Of the Kings, their Ministers, and the other Ma- 
gistrates of the Jewish people . . .298 
Chapter III. — Of the Government of the Jews, from the time of the 
Babylonian Captivity, to the subversion of their 
Civil and Ecclesiastical Polity , . . .306 
Chapter IV. — Of the courts of Judicature, and Legal Proceedings 

mentioned in the Scripture, . .310 

Chapter V Of the Criminal Law of the Jews . . .314 

Chapter VI. — Of the Punishments mentioned in the Scripture, 320 

Chapter VII -Of the Tribute and Taxes mentioned in the 

Scripture, . . . . .327 

Chapter VIII. — Of the Military affairs of the Jews and other 

nations mentioned in the Scripture, . .328 



DISSERTATION XVI. 
On the Sacred Antiquities of the Jews, 

Chapter I Of Sacred Places, .... 

Chapter II Of Sacred Times and Seasons, 

Chapter III. — Of Sacred Persons, .... 
Chapter IV. — Of Sacred Things, .... 

Chapter V Of the Idolatry mentioned in the Scripture, 

Chapter VI Of the Jewish Sects in the time of our Redeemer, 

DISSERTATION XVII. 



On the Domestic Antiquities of the Jews, . . .391 
Chapter L— Of the Habitations of the Hebrews and of the 

Furniture of their dwellings, . . . ib 
Chapter II. — Of the Nomadic or Pastoral Life of the Ancient 

Hebrews, . " . . . .399 

Chapter III f Agriculture among the Hebrews, . . 405 

Chapter IV. — State of Arts among the Hebrews, . . .415 

Chapter V State of the Sciences among the Hebrews, . . 421 

Chapter VI. — Of the state of Commerce and Navigation among 

the Hebrews, ..... 435 

Chapter VII.— Of the Dress of the Hebrews, . . .448 

Chapter VII I. — Of the Food and Repasts of the Hebrews, . 461 

Chapter IX. — Of Domestic Society among the Hebrews, . .471 



. 337 

. ib. 

. 346 

. 355 

. 366 

. 379 

. 388 



viii 



CONTENTS. 



Page 

Chapter X — Of the Social Manners, and Polite Usages of the 

Hebrews ..... 485 

Chapter XI Of the Games and Amusements to which allusion is 

made in the Scripture, . . . .493 

Chapter XII. — Of the manner of treating the dead, of Burial, and 

Mourning, among the Hebrews, . . . 498 



Of the Catholic 
Chapter I.- 

Chapter II.- 



Chapter III. — 



Section 
Section 



I.- 
II.- 



Section III.- 
Section IV.- 
Conclusion, 



DISSERTATION XVIII. 

Commentators ; and other writers on the Scripture, 504 
-First period — From the Apostolic times to the 

commencement of the Seventh Century, . ib. 

—Second period — From the commencement of the 
Seventh to the commencement of the Sixteenth 
Century, . . . . .513 

Third period — From the beginning of the Sixteenth 

Century to the present time, . . .526 

Of the Catholic Commentators, . . .527 

•Of the Protestant Commentators, . . .548 

-Of the Catholic Writers on the introduction to the 

Study of Scripture. . . . .555 

-Of the Protestant Writers on the introduction to 

the Study of Scripture, . . . - . 564 

. 570 



PREFACE. 



The Catholic reader will readily admit the necessity which 
existed for some such work as I have here ventured to offer to 
the Catholic public. So that, whatever apology may be required 
of me for the manner in which I have executed the task that I 
imposed upon myself, at least none shall be demanded on the 
ground of my having engaged in a superfluous undertaking. 
Other countries have their Catholic works — in the language of 
the country — on these subjects, which are introductory to the 
reading and study of the scripture ; whereas with us this field — 
as far as English works are concerned— has been left almost 
entirely to Protestants. And to show that the Protestant press 
of these countries has not been idle in the department of literature 
of which we speak, it is sufficient to refer to that bulky com- 
pilation by the Eev. T. H. Horne, which has now gone through 
eight or nine editions. It is at the same time, without doubt, a 
striking proof of the interest which attaches to these subjects, 
that this work should have found so many purchasers : for it is 
by no means such as would impress one with a high idea of the 
abilities of the compiler. No doubt this author, who knows the 
peculiar taste of that class of readers for whom he laboured, was 
fully aware that many defects would be passed over in a work 
which contains such brilliant specimens of Protestant zeal as the 
following. Treating of the proofs of the inspiration of scripture, 
in particular of the proof contained in the fulfilment of scripture 
prophecies, he sets down, as one of the most convincing argu- 
ments under this head, the fulfilment, in the person of the Roman 
pontiff, of the apocalyptic prophecies respecting Antichrist. Thus 
he writes : a ¥e see the characters of the least, and the false 
prophet, and the harlot of Babylon, now exemplified in every 
particular, and in a city that is seated upon seven mountains : 
so that, if the pontiff of Rome had sat for his picture, a more 



X 



PREFACE. 



accurate likeness could not have been drawn." ( Vol. 1, p. 328, 
seventh edition.) However Protestants may relish this kind of 
writing, it is unnecessary to tell Catholic readers that they could 
not, without pain and disgust, seek information in a work of this 
kind, even upon those subjects that may be treated in an inoffen- 
sive style. And, indeed, Protestant works upon theological 
subjects must, we may say, of necessity be offensive to a Catholic 
reader. Por, should they even be free from such stupid bigotry 
as Horne exhibits in the passage just quoted, still, the disregard 
which their authors, as a matter of course, entertain for that 
authority which Catholics revere, will break out occasionally in 
a form verv revolting to Catholic feelings. In short, the state of 
the case is this : we find on one hand a great desire of knowledge 
of a certain kind, whilst, on the other hand, there is no proper 
means provided whereby this desire may be gratified. Por it is 
laudable to seek knowledge of this sort ; but it is not laudable to 
seek it in all sorts of books. Water from the pure fountain is 
delicious to the weary traveller ; but it is better to endure thirst 
than to drink of the poisonous stream. Seeing, then, that the 
want which it is the object of the following work to supply is so 
very pressing, it is to be hoped that a generous public will kindly 
overlook its imperfections. Of these I am fully conscious. But 
lest I might be held responsible for defects which, in my opinion, 
are not fairly imputable to the work, I must declare that my 
principal object has not been to provide a book for the learned 
reader ; because his knowledge of Latin would enable him to 
draw from other sources the information which this work supplies. 
But my principal aim has been to present to the intelligent Ca- 
tholic public generally a book wherein they might read, in 
plain, and simple, and clear language, facts and doctrines highly 
interesting to a Christian. Hence I have, for the most part, 
given the titles of works in English ; and in general, wherever 
it was necessary to introduce a quotation in any other language, 
I have either subjoined a translation of it, or embodied its meaning 
substantially in the preceding or subsequent part of the context 
in which it is inserted. Por the same reason I have not, in the 
course of the work, delayed to make erudite observations on 
my authorities. Such observations break up, more or less, the 
continuity of a work ; and how much soever they may contribute 
to procure for the writer the praise of learning, they are sure 
rather to repel than attract the general reader. At the same 
time, I should hope that the book will not be without its 
advantages to the learned student also ; forasmuch as he may 
rind here, in a condensed form, information on several subjects 
which it may require much time and pains to collect from other 



PREFACE. 



xi 



sources.* Nor can it be said that the work contains no account 
of the authorities from which it has been compiled ; for the 
concluding dissertation gives a full account of these, and shows 
that there is no lack of materials for a book of the kind. How 
these materials have been used it is for others to say. 

In the first dissertation — on the canon of scripture — I have 
not delayed, precisely, on the questions regarding the genuineness, 
integrity, and veracity of the scripture. In our Catholic schools, 
at present, these questions form an important part of the theolo- 
gical treatise on the true Religion ; and, happily, the state of our 
country does not render it necessary for me to intrude here upon 
the department of others. Neither have I dwelt upon the history 
of the formation of the canon ; because, where so many subjects 
were to be discussed, and brevity was therefore to be consulted, 
I thought it better to content myself with setting forth clearly 
that broad and sure foundation — the authority of the church- — 
upon which, and upon which alone, the canon of scripture, at 
least adequately taken, rests immovably. And, treating the 
question of the canon thus, I did not think it advisable to follow 
the usual course of separating the question of inspiration from 
that of the canon. These questions, from their very nature, are 
intimately united ; and I trust that no obscurity upon the mind 
of the reader about either question will be the result of having 
treated them conjointly. 

The reader will perceive that in the concluding part of the 
work I have not confined myself to a notice of the authors who 
have written on the introduction to the scripture: but that, without 
omitting these, I have devoted much more space to the commenta- 
tors on scripture. I flatter myself that the Catholic reader will be 
grateful to me for introducing him to so many of our illustrious 
commentators. Having devoted so many years of my life to the 
reading of the works of these truly great men — the Catholic 
commentators— I could not but feel happy at having the oppor- 
tunity of, even thus briefly, commemorating them ; the more 
particularly when I see how modern English Protestant publica- 
tions are never tired of parading before the public flimsy sciolists, 
whom they have dignified with the name of learned expounders of 
the scriptures. 

For the few particulars of the biography of the writers on scrip- 
ture which the limits of this work permitted me to insert, I 
consulted Dupin, Simon, Moreri, Feller, Klein, and various other 

* Indeed, the dissertation on Hermeneuties , and some others, are 
intended in a very special manner for the benefit of the theological 
student. 



xii 



PKEFACE. 



sources ; and I feel confident that I have said nothing, either in 
praise or dispraise of any author, that shall not be fully borne 
out by a reference to his works. 

Some perhaps will find fault with the title of this work ; 
in defence of which I can only say that it would be very hard 
to find any title which, without being turned somewhat from its 
strict signification, could be fitly used to designate all those 
miscellaneous treatises that are comprised in an introduction to 
the Bible. • 

I trust that the work is free from any typographical error 
worth notice. There may be some slight mistakes in punctuation, 
which the intelligent reader will correct for himself. 

Finally, as I have devoted much time to the study of theology, 
and have been particularly careful not to allow myself, in the 
composition of this work, to be guided by the unsupported assertion 
of any author in whose orthodoxy I had not full confidence, I 
therefore trust that nothing shall be found in this book that does 
not fully harmonize with the teaching of the Catholic Church ; 
but if, notwithstanding all the pains which I have taken, any 
expression should have unconsciously dropt from me which is 
not in perfect accordance with that teaching, I hereby recal it ; 
and when such mistake shall be pointed out to me, I shall do all 
in my power to repair it publicly. 

JOSEPH DIXON. 



St. Patrick's College, Maynooth, 
2l§t May, 1852. 



DISSERTATION FIRST. 



CHAPTEE I. 

PRELIMINABY OBSERVATIONS STATE OE THE QUESTION. 

Catholic theologians commonly treat of the inspiration and the 
canon of scripture under distinct heads. We shall take leave to 
follow a different plan ; for, by combining the notice of inspi- 
ration with that of the canon the object which we have in view in 
the following dissertation, and which has been explained in the 
introduction, shall be equally well attained, whilst unnecessary 
repetitions shall be avoided. And, in truth, the two questions 
are most intimately connected; for what is meant by the 
canon of scripture ? The Greek word xavuv signifies a rule or 
standard. The name is applied to the book which has been 
declared by competent authority to be inspired — that is the 
bible — because this book is an authoritative rule or standard, 
although not the sole rule, of faith and morals. And inasmuch 
as the bible is made up of several distinct books, not all written 
at the same time, hence, the word canon, as applied to the 
scripture, has come to convey the peculiar idea of a list or 
catalogue. The canon of scripture, therefore, is that list or 
catalogue of inspired books which has been made by competent 
authority. Any book or part of a book, holding a place on it, is 
termed canonical scripture. We see then, from the very defini- 
tion of the canon, how intimately connected with it is the 
question of inspiration. 

All Catholics, of course, hold that the Christian canon is 
truly set forth in the following statement of the Council of Trent, 
sess. 4 : — 

" The books of sacred scripture are the following : — Of the 
Old Testament, the five books of Moses : that is, Genesis, Exodus, 
Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Euth, the, 



2 



PEELnilXARY OBSERVATIONS. 



four "books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, of Esclras the first 
book, and the second which is called Kfehemias, Tobias, Judith, 
Esther, Job, the Psaltery of David of a hundred and fifty psalms, 
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Eccle- 
siasticus, Isaias, Jereinias, with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the 
twelve minor prophets, that is Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, 
Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Mala- 
chias, two books of Machabees, the first and second. Of the 
New Testament, the Eour Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, 
Luke, and John ; the Acts of the Apostles, written by Luke the 
Evangelist ; fourteen Epistles of Paul, to the Romans, two to the 
Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philip- 
pians, to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, 
to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews ; of Peter the Apostle, 
two epistles ; of John the Apostle, three : of James the Apostle, 
one ; of Jude the Apostle, one ; and the Apocalypse of John the 
Apostle." The Council then proceeds to define and decree 
solemnly, that the entire of these books, with all their parts, ara 
to be received as sacred and canonical. 

Observe here, that according to a common manner of speaking 
of our theologians, the books of scripture, although all having 
now the same authority, are divided into two classes — the pro- 
tocanonical and the deuterocanonical; the protocanonical are 
those of whose authority there was never any doubt entertained 
in the church ; the deuterocanonical are those of whose canoni- 
calness some in the church, at one period, entertained doubts. 
The deuterocanonical portions of the scripture are the follow- 
ing : — In the Old Testament, the books of Esther, Tobias, Judith, 
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the two books of Machabees, 
and some portions of the book of Daniel, viz. : the history of 
Susanna, of Bel and the dragon, and the Canticle of the Three 
Children ; in the New Testament, the Epistle of St. Paul to the 
Hebrews, Epistle of St. James, Epistle of St. Jude, Second 
Epistle of St. Peter, Second and Third Epistles of St. John, the 
Apocalypse ; and besides these books the last twelve verses of 
the Gospel of St. Mark, and in the Gospel of St. I/uke the pas- 
sage found in the 22nd chapter regarding the bloody sweat of 
our Eedeemer, and the angel coming to comfort Him ; in the 
Gospel of St. John, the history of the woman taken in adultery, 
contained in the beginning of the 8th chapter. Such are the 
deuterocanonical portions of the scripture — of course the re- 
mainder of our canon comes under the denomination of proto- 
canonical. The canon of scripture admitted by the Anglican 
church is given in the sixth of the thirty-nine articles. The 
article says — " In the name of the Holy Scripture we do under- 



NATURE AND EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 



3 



stand those canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, of 
whose authority was never any doubt in the church." Then is 
added a list of the books of the Old Testament, which the 
Anglican church receives as canonical. The article continues — 
" And the other books (as Hierom saith) the church doth read 
for example of life, and instruction of manners ; but yet it doth 
not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these fol- 
lowing. ,, Here follow the books not admitted by them into the 
canon, all of which we admit, except the 3rd and 4th of Esdras, 
and the prayer of Manasses. We find that the article excludes 
from the canon all the deuterocanonical portions of the Old Tes- 
tament with the exception of the book of Esther, and that of 
this book also it excludes the seven last chapters. As to the 
New Testament the article says — "All the books of the New 
Testament as they are commonly received, do we receive and 
account them canonical." In the New Testament the Anglican 
canon is the same as ours. The Westminster or Presbyterian 
confession receives the same books as the church of England ; 
but of those portions of the Old Testament which it does not 
admit into the canon, it says — " The books commonly called 
Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the 
canon of the scripture ; and therefore are of no authority in the 
church of God ; nor to be any otherwise approved or made use 
of than other human writings."— Westminster Confession, chap, i, 
sect. 3. Consistently with what has been already said in the 
introduction, our principal scope in the following observations 
upon the canon will be to vindicate the Catholic church in the 
matter of admitting into the canon those deuterocanonical parts 
of the Old Testament which the Protestants of these countries 
exclude from the rank of canonical scripture. The canon being 
the approved catalogue of inspired hooks, we proceed, in the first 
place, to dispose of the question of inspiration. 



CHAPTER II. 

NATURE AND EXTENT OE INSPIRATION. 

Inspiration, as understood in this matter, means a certain influ- 
ence of the Divine Spirit upon the mind of a writer, moving him 
to wr.ite, and so acting upon him whilst he writes, that his work or 
writing is truly the word of God. Inspiration does not always 
imply revelation, for, inspiration extends even to those things 
which were previously known to the writer. 

As to the extent of inspiration, there have been, and still 



4 



NATURE A!N T D EXTEXT OE EXSPIRAr ON". 



are, various opinions even among Catholics : neither are the 
Protestants, who admit the inspiration of scripture, agreed among 
themselves as to its extent. The very unsettled views of Pro- 
testants upon this matter shall he referred to afterwards, in 
confirmation of the necessity of having recourse to the Catholic 
method of proving the inspiration of the scriptures. As to 
Catholics, we may say that all are agreed thus far — that it can- 
not be admitted that the sacred writers fell into any, the least, 
mistake or error in their writings. We may well lay this down 
as the teaching of all Catholic theologians, for the singular 
opinion of Henry Holden {De Analy. Fidei, 1 — 5,) as Pather 
Perrone justly observes, would lead to conclusions altogether 
foreign from the sense of the Catholic church. — Perrone, de locis 
Theologicis, part ii> cap. ii, JYo. 29. Holden was of opinion that 
inspiration did not secure the sacred writers from slight errors, 
such as might proceed from a defect of memory in matters which 
did not regard doctrine. But of such an opinion it is enough to 
say, in conformity with St. Augustine's line of argument in 
various places — (JEpistol. viii, ad Hieronymiim, and L. %i, contra 
Famstum,) — that if it be once admitted that any error could 
proceed from the sacred writers, what portion of scripture will 
he secure from doubt and cavil ?* There is another opinion 
which has been at one time advocated by certain Catholic writers, 
which we also unhesitatingly reject, viz., that a book, which in 
its origin was the production merely of human industry', might 
become sacred scripture in consequence of some subsequent tes- 
timony of the Holy Spirit to the effect that the book contained 
nothing false. Such an opinion can neither be reconciled with 
the notions which the faithful have always entertained regarding 
sacred scripture, nor with the express and clear texts of the fathers, 
as may be seen by the subsequent references to some of the 
fathers contained in this dissertation. Hence it is not wonderful 
that the divines of Louvain and Doway, in the year 1588, should 
have condemned the following proposition: — " Liber aliquis, 
qualis forte est secundus llachabaeoruin humana industria sine 
assistentia Spiritus Sancti scrip tus, si Spiritus Sanctus postea 
testetur ibi nihil esse falsuni efficitur scriptura sacra." 

Again, the opinion put forward by Cornelius a Lapide, writing 
on the text of St. Paul to Timothy : ' ' All scripture divinely 
inspired," etc. (2 Tim. iii, 16,) appears still to fail short of what 
inspiration requires in the writer of scripture. According to 
him, in those historical portions of the sacred text in which the 

* xt is but fair to state here, that some have denied that Holden 
intended to convey the meaning which has been imputed to him, as to 
the nature of inspiration. 



NATURE AND EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 



5 



writer details facts already known to him, either by his having 
been a witness of them himself, or his having learned them from 
the testimony of others — in all such portions of scripture, accord- 
ing to this learned commentator, inspiration merely requires a 
simple superintendence of the Spirit, by which the writer is 
guarded against any mistake in the relation of these facts. This 
opinion, we say, (although embraced by many,) falls short of 
what is required for inspiration : for, in the first place, it would 
be difficult to understand what better title, in this case, such 
portions of scripture would have to the character of inspired 
writings than the written decrees in matters of faith made by 
general councils : yet these decrees, although accurately expres- 
sing divine truth, in consequence of the infallible assistance of 
the Holy Ghost, are not considered to come under the head of 
inspired writings. Again, it does not appear that the language 
of the fathers, in reference to the inspiration of the scriptures, 
can be at all reconciled with this opinion. "We must here beg 
of the reader to examine for himself the quotations from the 
fathers, which we shall afterwards adduce when we come to the 
proof of the doctrine of inspiration. He will find that the lan- 
guage of the fathers perfectly harmonizes with what has been 
the persuasion of the faithful at all times, viz., that what we 
read in the scripture has been said by the Holy Ghost, in the 
sense, that the whole subject matter of the scriptures has been 
suggested by the Spirit, even where the subject was already 
known to the writer. And such is our opinion as to the extent 
of inspiration. Of course where the matter was already known 
to the writer, a simple suggestion of what he should write was 
sufficient ; revelation being only required when there was 
question of something previously unknown to him. 

Many have considered even the verbal inspiration of scripture 
clearly proved both by the manner in which the holy fathers 
express themselves regarding inspiration, and by the way in 
which the scriptures have been ever viewed in the church, viz., 
as containing the inspired language of the Holy Ghost ; nor does 
it appear that any insuperable difficulty can be brought against 
this opinion. Yet with St. Alphonsus Liguori— [Exposition of 
Council of Trent on Session IV,) we consider it more probable 
that, generally speaking, the very words have not been inspired. 
In the first place, neither the authority of the scripture, nor its 
dignity as an inspired work, requires us to carry inspiration so 
far as this ; neither, if we carefully examine them, do the expres- 
sions of the fathers, or the persuasion of the faithful, as to the 
nature of inspiration, demand of us to admit the inspiration of 
the very words. Indeed this opinion of ours, which is opposed 



6 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED, 



to the admission of verbal inspiration, appears clearly to coincide 
with the doctrine of some of the fathers at least, as St. Jerome, 
[JEpist. ad Algas.,) and St. Augustine, {Lib. ii, De consensu 
Evangelist., cap. xii.) Moreover, in this opinion difficulties are 
removed, which must appear very considerable if it be necessary 
to defend verbal inspiration. Thus we see why the sacred writers 
express themselves sometimes as persons would who were con- 
vinced of the necessity under which they lay of using care and 
diligence in the work they had undertaken. We see why the 
author of the 2nd book of Alachabees could even ask pardon for 
his defects, meaning the defects in his style of writing: "I 
will," he says, "here make an end of my narration; which if 

1 have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I 
desired; b ut if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me." — 

2 Machab., xv, 39. Again, it is easily explained, in this opinion, 
why the same sentiments and the same events are found ex- 
pressed or related by the different evangelists in different words. 

But although, in our opinion, it is not necessary to admit 
verbal inspiration, generally speaking, yet we must hold there 
was such a superintendence with regard to the words as would not 
permit the use of any words other than those w T hich would express 
accurately the sentiment or fact that was to be committed to 
writing. Again, it is more probable that in some places the 
very words were inspired, particularly in some of the pro- 
phecies : thus Jeremias appears to have had the very words 
suggested to him, when, as Baruch testifies, he dictated to him 
(Baruch) as one reading out of a book — Jeremias, xxxvi, 18. 
But, above all, we are to admit this verbal inspiration in those 
portions of the scriptures in which mysteries of faith are written ; 
for here the doctrine itself was, of its own nature, so obscure to 
the mind of the writer, that there is a manifest incongruity in 
supposing that the Holy Spirit would have left to him (the 
writer) the selection of the words in which he was to express 
that doctrine. 



CHAPTEB III. 

HOW IS THE INSPIRATION OE THE SCRIPTURES PROVED. 

Our object in the following chapter is not only — nor so much — 
to prove the inspiration of the scripture against those who deny 
it, but still more to probe the method of proving inspiration which 
they adopt who reject the authority of the Catholic church ; to 
see if this method is sufficient to attain its object, or if it be not 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 



7 



necessary, to abandon it, and adopt another at variance with thejr 
own principles and confirmatory of the doctrine of Catholics 
regarding tradition and the infallibility of the church. 

When it is asked, How is the inspiration of scripture proved ? 
the question may be viewed in a twofold aspect. First, it may 
mean, How is it proved that there is any booh in the to or Id which has 
heen ivritten under that influence of the Holy Spirit which is called 
inspiration ; and, secondly, it may mean, How is it proved that a 
certain booh in particular, consisting of such and such component 
parts, has been written under the influence of inspiration ? And it 
is to be observed that, whether' we consider the question in one 
point of view or the other, the proof to be adduced must be a suf- 
ficient one upon which to rest a doctrine that is to be held of 
faith, for such is the doctrine that it is required to establish in 
either case. 

First, then, if it be asked, How is it proved that there is any 
booh in the world which has been written under the influence of in- 
spiration ? We admit that this question presents comparatively 
but little difficulty. It does not belong to our scope to enter 
upon it here ; for, in truth, it does not present the subject of our 
enquiry in a practical point of view at all, and our only motive for 
drawing attention to it is, to guard the reader against imagining 
that we are disposed to exaggerate the difficulties that lie in the 
way of proving inspiration on Protestant principles. We do 
admit if the question were to be treated in this abstract form, 
several, though not all, of these difficulties would be removed ; 
but the great and practical question, which all who hold the 
inspiration of the scriptures must entertain is this, How is it 
proved that a certain booh in particular, called the Bible, made up 
of such and such component parts, is inspired ? A satisfactory 
reply to this question will involve the proof of the canon, as 
well as the proof of the inspiration, because it will show how 
the inspiration of all the parts which go to make the Bible, is 
proved. But in examining the method which Protestants follow 
in proving inspiration, we shall consider it with reference to 
their own canon ; that is to say, we shall examine how far such 
or such proofs of inspiration, advanced by Protestants, -avail to 
establish the inspiration of their own canon. 

The Protestants of these countries admit with us the great 
importance of this question. A high Anglican authority has 
thus expressed himself lately upon this matter : — " To deny the 
inspiration of scripture is one step towards the rejection of the 
gospel as a revelation from God. Against this fatal heresy I 
would earnestly caution my younger brethren, as being one from 
which, in the present state of the human mind, we have much 



8 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PSOTED. 



more to fear than from the encroachments of popery."* "We 
are here told, and truly, that to deny inspiration is to embrace 
a fatal heresy. On the other hand, the church of England, in 
her sixth article, declares that "holy scripture containeth all 
things necessary to salvation ; so that whatsoever is not read 
therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any 
man, that it should be believed as an article of faith or to be thought 
requisite or necessary to salvation." "We shall see just now, 
how, by adhering to the doctrine of this article, any one can be 
convicted of fatal heresy for denying the inspiration of scripture. 

But first, a word or two on the Presbyterian method of 
proving inspiration. According to this class of Protestants, 
men may be moved to a high veneration of the scriptures by the 
testimony of the church ; they say, moreover, that these scrip- 
tures show themselves forth as the word of God by the heavenly 
nature of their subject matter, the efficacy of their doctrine, 
majesty of their style, agreement of their parts, scope of the 
whole, and their other perfections ; yet they contend that the 
full persuasion of the divine authority of the scripture must 
proceed from the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the heart of 
the Christian, and not from the testimony of man or any church 
whatever. — Westminster Confession, chap, i, sects. 4, 5. "We see 
that according to this mode of proving inspiration, the force of 
the proof is made to rest upon the testimony of the Spirit in the 
heart of the Christian ; and they adduce the same proof for both 
inspiration and the canon. Xow, whosoever would deny the 
inspiration of scripture or the canonical authority of any of its 
parts, would, most certainly, deny the existence of such testi- 
mony in the heart of the Christian as is here appealed to, and 
thus the point at issue would remain as unsettled as it was 
before. On this kind of proof the Protestant Burnet ob- 
serves : — " This is only an argument to him that feels it, if it 
is one at all ; and, therefore, it proves nothing to another per- 
son." — BurneWs Exposition of the XXXIX Articles — on 
Article 6. 

Anglicans generally rest their proof of this doctrine of inspi- 
ration on the miracles and prophecies recorded in scripture, and, 
in addition to these, on what are called the internal evidences, 
viz., sublime doctrine, harmony of parts, preservation, effects. 
Such is the proof set forth in Home's Introduction. It is not 
unusual, however, with Anglicans, to refer here to the tradition 
of the early church ; and this is done by those particularly, 

* Extract from the Pastoral Charge of the Protestant Bishop of London, 
delivered in St. Paul's Cathedral, 2nd November, 1850, and published in 
the Times of about the same date. 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 



9 



who combine together the proof of inspiration and that of the 
canon of scripture, as Burnet, in the work above-mentioned. 

We proceed now to prove, firstly — that mere scriptural argu- 
ments are insufficient to establish the inspiration of the bible; 
secondly — we shall then show how this doctrine is fully and 
adequately proved. 

Firstly. The question here is between Catholics and such 
Protestants as admit the inspiration of the scriptures : con- 
sequently, it is admitted on both sides that the scripture is the 
word of God ; not only because it contains truths revealed by 
God, but, because the writers of scripture were so influenced by 
God in the writing of it, that God is the principal author of the 
work or writing which they have produced. The scripture, 
therefore, is the word of Gcd, not only because it contains divine 
truth, but, because it was divinely written, or written under 
such an influence of God as we have just now mentioned. This 
is a point most carefully to be kept in view in this matter ; for, 
a writing may contain divine truth, and yet not be sacred scrip- 
ture. This is a truth so obvious that few will hesitate to admit 
it. It will be rendered still more clear by an example : Let us 
suppose that Mcodemus, after returning to his house, had faith- 
fully committed to writing the discourse of our Bedeemer which 
is recorded in the third chapter of St. John's Gospel, he would, 
in that case, have written divine truth. — sacred doctrine ; but, 
in order that his record of the discourse should have been, 
moreover, sacred scripture, as the record of this same discourse 
is in St. John's Gospel, he should have had from God a com- 
mission to write — he should have been moved and inspired to 
commit to writing what he heard. Now, this commission to 
write — this moving and inspiring to write — is not supposed in 
the case of Mcodemus. In a word, for sacred scripture it 
is not enough that the matter which is written be true, and 
such as can be traced to a divine origin, but it is, moreover, 
necessary that the fact of such matter being committed to writing 
proceed from God as the principal author of the writing. 

Let us consider now the arguments for the inspiration, which 
are brought from the scriptures themselves. 

First. It is obvious on the face of the matter, that the 
internal marks which are alleged — such as harmony of parts, Sfc, 
will not prove the existence of a divine commission to write those 
books. 

Secondly. The miracles and prophecies recorded in scripture 
are appealed to. It is true that such miracles and prophecies 
proceed from God, but consider how many portions of the scrip- 
ture relate neither miracles nor prophecies. Again, in order 



10 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED*. 



that miracles or prophecies would prove any doctrine, they should 
be performed or uttered in such circumstances that to admit 
their truth would involve the admission of the truth of the doc- 
trine in question, as, otherwise, there would be no necessary 
connection between the performing of the miracle, for instance, 
and the establishing of the doctrine; now, whoever will atten- 
tively examine the miracles and prophecies recorded in scripture, 
shall perceive, that, with very few exceptions, the truth of these 
would not be affected by the admission that none of the writers 
of scripture had received from God a commission to write or were 
inspired writers* 

Thirdly. Texts are quoted from Moses, the royal psalmist, 
and the prophets, containing declarations that God spoke through 
them. In. reply, it may be said that the expressions quoted from 
the books of Moses do not apply to Genesis. Nor does David 
inform us in what number of psalms God has spoken by him, 
and as to all such expressions it may be asked, how do they 
prove that the books in question were ivritten under the influ- 
ence of inspiration ? We say nothing of the books of the Old 
Testament of which the authors are unknown, Judges, Buth, 
third and fourth books of Kings, Job ; nor do we speak of other 
books in which no such declarations as are here referred to are 
to be found. 

Fourthly. Many of those who undertake to prove the inspi- 
ration of the scripture independently of the infallible authority 
of the church, rest the proof of the inspiration of the Old Testa- 
ment principally on texts found in the New. We do not reject 
this argument as altogether destitute of weight ; but its perfect 
conclusiveness is another question. In the way of such con- 
clusiveness, many difficulties may be raised. Thus — the text 
from the New Testament which is always adduced in the first 
place, by those with whom we are here contending, is taken 
from the second epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, iii, 16, msm% 
yoa<pri OeoxvsvffToz, '/.cci oopsXi/JLog <7rpoc, dtdu<r/.ct\iav, %, r. X. and the 
meaning which they put upon it is, " All scripture is inspired 
of God, and is profitable" Sfc. Now, although this may be the 
meaning of the text, it is capable of a different interpretation, 
viz., All scripture, which is inspired of God, is also profitable, 
8fc; and it is this latter meaning which Grotius, no mean judge, 
considers the true sense of the text. — Comment, in locum. This 
is also the meaning assigned to it by our ancient Yulgate ver- 
sion ; according to which meaning the text does not say what 
scripture is inspired of God, but merely that whatsoever scrip- 
ture is so inspired, is also profitable, &c. So much for this text. 
Without dwelling in detail upon the other passages quoted from 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 



11 



the New Testament by our present adversaries, we may say, 
with an illustrious Catholic theologian, Perrone — Be Locis Theo- 
ogicis, pars ii } cap. ii, No. 134, — that it is legging the question 
to attempt to prove the inspiration of the Old Testament by 
these texts, unless the divine authority of the testimonies here 
referred to be first established. Thus it becomes again necessary 
to fall back upon the constant faith of the church. 

We have already said that we are not disposed to deny its 
proper value to the argument for the inspiration of the Old, 
drawn from texts in the New Testament. The strength of this 
argument is best seen in the following mode of stating it — The 
Jew 8, in the time of our Redeemer and his apostles, believed in the 
inspiration of their scriptures; hut our Redeemer and the apostles 
have used repeated expressions calculated to confirm the Jews in this 
belief: therefore these scriptures are inspired. The major propo- 
sition we shall not dispute — and even if the whole argument 
were conceded, the inspiration of the New Testament would 
still remain to be proved. Eut let it be remembered that where 
this argument states that our Redeemer and his apostles used 
repeated expressions calculated to confirm the Jews in the belief 
of the inspiration of their scriptures, this assertion, according to 
Protestants, rests exclusively upon texts of the New Testament ; 
the authority of which texts they would find it very hard to 
establish, without first proving the inspiration of the New Tes- 
tament. 

Well, let us come now to the question of the inspiration of the 
New Testament. How is it to be established ? Here the exclu- 
sively scriptural sources of proof altogether fail us, as will be seen 
by examining each argument which Protestants adduce. To refer 
to the sublime character of the doctrine, harmony of the parts, 
miracles and prophecies therein recorded, will no more prove the 
inspiration of the writers of the New Testament, than a similar 
mode of arguing would establish the inspiration of the writers of 
the Old Testament. If texts of the New Testament be appealed 
to, then we say — First, according to what has been already more 
than once remarked, these texts will not prove the inspiration 
of the New Testament, unless their own divine authority be first 
conclusively established. Now, as such texts are but few, and by 
no means prominent, it is manifest that, as long as the inspiration 
of the book is the point at issue, the divine authority of these 
texts cannot be established conclusively by those who reject the 
infallible authority of the church. We say, secondly, that all 
the texts of the New Testament which are said to involve a 
promise of inspiration to write; such as those found in St. 
Matthew, x ; and in St. John, xiv, and xvi ; have reference 



12 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 



exclusively to the apostles. How, all! the New Testament was 
not written by the apostles, nor is there any proof from the 
scripture that those parts not written by apostles were at least 
approved of by the apostles. Thus, whether we speak of the 
Catholic canon or the Protestant canon of scripture, we find that 
mere scriptural arguments fall far short of a full and adequate 
proof of the inspiration of the sacred volume. It is not 
wonderful, then, that this conclusion, to which we have arrived 
by a minute enquiry into the premises, should be strongly 
insisted upon by our Catholic theologians. See among others 
Melchior Canus — De locis Theologicis, liter secundus, cap. 7, — 
EeUarrnine — De verbo Dei non scripto, cap. iv, circa medium — and 
Milner — End of Religious Controversy, letter ix. 

The proof of the inspiration of the scriptures is easy on 
Catholic principles : and, conformably to these principles, we set 
forth the following as our proof of this doctrine. 

The church of Christ has always held and taught the doc- 
trine of the inspiration of the scriptures : 

Eut the church could not have held and taught this doctrine, 
and erred in doing so : 

Therefore the scriptures are inspired. 

The major proposition — that the church has always held and 
taught this doctrine, can be easily established. For the early 
period of the church's history, we need no better witnesses of 
her belief and practice than the holy fathers. Out of the 
abundant testimonies bearing upon the point in question, which 
might be adduced from these, we shall cite the following: first, 
St. Clement, of Eome, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, 
calls the scriptures holy, and says, that they are the oracles of 
the Holy Ghost, which can contain nothing unjust, nothing false ; 
and, quoting the scripture, he thus writes: " For the Holy 
Spirit says, let not the wise man glory in his wisdom." — Epistle 
first to Corinthians, sec. 13. Second, St. Polycarp, in his 
epistle to the Ephesians, in like manner calls the scriptures 
holy, and among them he places the epistle of St. Paul, 
addressed to themselves. Third, St. Justin Martyr declares, 
that the words of the prophets are to be considered " not as the 
words of those who were inspired, but of the Divine "Word 
which moved them." And he reckons Moses the first of the 
prophets, and his writings he puts down as prophecy. — Apol. 
1, sec. 36. In his dialogue with Tryphon, he says of the 
writers of scripture, that they spoke by the Divine Spirit — 
were filled with the Holy Ghost — 02/ w msv/Jbari XccXr^avTs;, ayiu 
vXrjpctjhvTes xvev^aTi. Fourth, St. Iremeus describes the 
scriptures as perfect, because the word of Grod and his Spirit 



now is inspiration proved. 



13 



speaks in them. — Adversus Heteroses, lib. it, cap, 47. Fifth, 
Clement of Alexandria says, that the prophets were inspired 
e(Awvev<thvrse , and he says this on the occasion of quoting a 
testimony from Proverbs, which proves that every part of the 
scripture went by the name of prophecy. — Lib. 1. Stromatum 
xvii. Sixth, Origen, in his 5th book against Celsus, says, that 
Jews and Christians agree in this, "that the sacred books were 
written by the Divine Spirit : " and in the preface to his com- 
mentary on St. Luke, he says, that the four evangelists wrote, 
being inspired by the Holy Ghost : and again in the preface on 
St. ilatthew, he says, that they wrote with the co-operation of 
the Holy Ghost, <fvveo yavvrog rov ayiov Tluzv^arog. Seventh, 
St. Cyprian, in his book on the Unity of the Church, says, 
that the Holy Spirit speaks by the Apostle Paul in his epis- 
tles. Eighth, St. Athanasius says, "all our scripture, whe- 
ther new or old, has proceeded from divine inspiration. " 
Epist. to Marcellin. on the interpretation of the Psalms. Mnth, 
St. Augustine styles the scripture " the Epistle of the Almighty 
to his creature." — Serm. 2 in Ps. xc, n. 1 ; and Enarr. in Ps. 
cxlix. n, 5. Tenth, St. Gregory the Great, speaking of the 
author of the book^ of Job, says "who wrote these things is a 
very superfluous question, since it is faithfully believed that 
the Holy Ghost is the author of the book. He therefore wrote 
these things, who dictated them to the writer. He wrote them, 
who was the inspirer of the work, and who, by the voice of 
the writer, transmitted these things to us." — (Prsef. in Job, cap. 
i.) It is unnecessary, in a matter so clear, to accumulate further 
individual testimonies. We might cite a whole crowd of inter- 
preters, all of whom, by their manner of interpreting — searching 
after a sacred meaning, not alone in sentences, but in single 
words — sufficiently manifest their views of the divine origin of 
the entire scripture. And this is the public and unanimous sense 
of the whole Catholic church, continued through all subsequent 
ages down to our times ; although as far as it affirms that all 
things in the scriptures were divinely written — that is, pro- 
ceeded from divine inspiration — it has never been confirmed by 
a solemn definition of the church. Eor, the Council of Trent, 
session 4th, in its solemn decree on the scriptures and divine 
traditions, manifestly abstracts from the question, whether be- 
sides the salutary truth and discipline contained in the sacred boohs 
the other things therein contained were divinely either revealed 
or dictated — or in any manner divinely written. The public 
and unanimous sense, however, of the Catholic church attests the 
doctrine, that the entire contents of the sacred books were written 
under the influence of inspiration. 



14 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PEOYED. 



"We come now to the minor proposition, viz., that the 
chnrch could not hare held and taught this doctrine of inspira- 
tion, and erred in doing so. The reason of this is, that this 
sense of the Catholic church — which sense is public and com- 
mon as regards the divinity of the whole scripture, both of the 
Old and New Testaments — could not be false, unless the promise 
of Christ — to send his Spirit for the guidance of his church — 
had failed. For, it is abundantly proved by our theologians, 
passim, and it is not only a prominent doctrine of tradition, but 
patent on the very face of the scriptures, that Christ promised 
such assistance of the Holy Ghost to his church, that the entire 
church should neither err itself at any time, nor teach error in a 
matter of divine faith — either by teaching anything contrary to 
dogmas divinely received, or by proposing any dogma as divinely 
received, which was not such. Now the church would err in a 
matter of faith, if it erred in proposing all the things related in 
the scriptures — or any one of them — as inspired by the Holy 
Ghost. For in this case it would propose something to be 
believed on the authority of God, which would not, in reality, 
have the sanction of his authority. We see, then, how by means 
of the infallibility of the church we have perfect security for the 
truth of the tradition regarding the inspiration of the entire 
scriptures, both of the Old and Sew Testament ; and thus, in 
conclusion, we arrive at a full and adequate proof of the inspira- 
tions of the scripture. 

Such is our proof of the inspiration of the scriptures, which 
rests upon the infallibility of the church as its rirm support. 
By an adequate proof o£ inspiration we mean a proof which con- 
cludes for all the parts of the actual canon of scripture. As to 
the other arguments, which are brought in support of this doc- 
trine of inspiration, it is quite manifest on the very face of the 
question, that whatever degree of weight one may attach to 
them, he must ultimately have recourse to our proof, in order 
to establish the inspiration of at least a great portion of the New 
Testament. For how, without recurring to the infallibility of 
the church, could we be certain of the inspiration of the Gospels 
of St. Mark and St. Luke, or of the Acts of the Apostles ? Sup- 
pose that some one were to say that the tradition of the ancients 
regarding the inspiration of these books originated in an opinion 
on the part of the pastors of the church, which they considered 
highly probable, but in which they were deceived ; there would 
be no conclusive argument to overturn this assertion, if we 
abstracted from it the infallibility of the church. Hence we see, 
that Protestants, who hold the inspiration of the New Testa- 
ment, in admitting this doctrine, fall into two manifest incon- 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 



15 



sistencies : 1st, by admitting, in a matter of faith, what cannot 
be proved by the scriptures ; and 2nd, by admitting a point of 
doctrine, the proof of which implies the admission of the 
church's infallibility. 

Let us here observe, that the authority of the church — upon 
which the proof of the inspiration of the scripture must 
ultimately rest — determines for us also the component parts of 
that book which is inspired ; so that, the true and proper proof 
of the inspiration of the bible is based upon an authority, which, 
together with the inspiration, proves and establishes the canon 
of scripture. This shall appear more fully in the next chapter, 

Before referring to the objections that are brought against 
what has been said in proof of inspiration, we shall treat briefly 
of the fate which this doctrine has experienced among Protes- 
tants since the Reformation. Reflection upon this point will 
tend to confirm the truth, that this doctrine is placed in safety 
only among those who adhere to the infallible authority of the 
church. As the verlal inspiration — or the inspiration of the 
very words of scripture — was the common theory in the Catho- 
lic schools in the sixteenth century, to this the Protestants 
adhered firmly for a length of time. Grotius was considered to * 
have but lax notions on the veneration due to the scripture, 
because he rejected the hypothesis of a verbal inspiration in 
several parts of the sacred volume. And, indeed, one might 
have expected exalted views upon this matter, from those who 
professed such an extraordinary veneration for the bible, as did 
the Reformers. But soon did the principle of private judgment 
assert its right to deal with this doctrine as it pleased itself. 
JSTot only do the Unitarians and the Anti-supernaturalists, or 
Rationalists, reject altogether the hypothesis of that supernatural 
influence on the writers of scripture, which is termed inspiration, 
but even those Protestants, who are ranked among the most 
orthodox of the super naturalist class, such as the Anglicans, 
tolerate great laxity of opinion on this question. Thus, Home, 
in a work so popular among Protestants generally in these 
countries — although he is more careful in his seventh edition, 
than in earlier ones, of his Introduction — speaks in a manner 
which shows very undefined and incorrect views upon this mat- 
ter : — he says, " that the authors of the historical books of the 
Old Testament were occasionally inspired is certain, since they 
frequently display an acquaintance with the counsels and design 
of God, and often reveal his future dispensation in the clearest 
predictions. But though it is evident that the sacred historians 
sometimes wrote under the immediate operation of the Holy 
Spirit, it does not follow, that they derived from revelation the 



15 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PEOVED. 



knowledge of those things which might be collected from the 
common source of hnman intelligence. It is sufficient to believe, 
that by the general superintendence of the Holy Spirit they 
were directed in the choice of their materials, enlightened to. 
judge of the truth and importance of those accounts, from which 
they borrowed their information, and prevented from recording 
any material error.'' — Home's Introduction to the Critical Study 
of the Scriptures, vol. 1, p. 475, 7th edition. But, upon this 
question, as upon several others, we find the action of that great 
principle of the Reformers — private judgment — more fully de- 
veloped among the so-called theologians of Germany, than any 
where else. Even some of the most esteemed of the Protestant 
theologians of that country — men who were not of the Rationalist 
or Anti-supernaturalist class — have taken the most extraordinary 
liberties with this question. As an instance, we may refer to 
John David Michaelis, in his Introduction to the New Testament. 
— Marsh's Translation, vol. 1 9 p. 76, 4th edition. "We deem it 
superfluous to quote the words of Michaelis. He states fairly, 
however, in the place here referred to, that " no Protestant can 
appeal on this subject to the testimony of the church." Upon 
which statement, his translator, Marsh, observes in a note — "It 
is well known, that the rejection of oral tradition, and the in- 
fallibility of the church, is one of the characteristics of Pro- 
testantism. But Augustine, in his book Contra Epistolam 
Fundamenti, cap. 5, says, ' Ego vero Evangelio non crederem nisi 
me commoveret ecclesim auctoritas? " * — Same vol. of Marsh's 
Michaelis, p. 381. The meaning of St. Augustine is, that it is 
upon the authority of the church that he received the gospels, as 
the genuine and inspired word of God ; but it would puzzle the 
reader to discover why Marsh has put these words of St. Augus- 
tine in juxta-position with his own assertion respecting Pro- 
testantism, unless it was for the purpose of showing that St. 
Augustine was not a Protestant. If we pass on to the 
Rationalist school, which has acquired such notoriety in Ger- 
many, we shall find that these reject altogether the idea of 
inspiration. Such has been the fate of this question in the 
country that makes it its boast, that it was the first in these 
latter times to deny the authority of the church. The progress 
of private judgment in Germany, on the inspiration of scripture, 
until it ended in its total rejection, is accurately described in the 
well-known work of a Protestant writer, the Rev. Hugh James 
Rose : he says, " The first step was to renounce the unnecessary 

* That is, I iconic! not believe the gospel, did not the authority of the church 
move me thereto. 



HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 



17 



hypothesis of an inspiration, extended to every word and lettei 
in scripture. But, after proposing a variety of theories as to 
the various ranks and degrees of inspiration, after accepting for 
a moment the belief that although the supposition of an imme- 
diate supernatural agency at every instant is superfluous, God, 
who had appointed the apostles to teach Christianity, enabled 
them by the help of his Spirit to teach it rightly, and to avoid 
error and falsehood ; this belief, too, was given up, and it was 
determined that all notion of an immediate agency was to be 
rejected on some strange physical and psychological grounds, 
that it was repugnant to reason, that it was irreconcilable both 
with the freedom of the writers and the quality of their works, 
and, moreover, that it admitted of no imaginable proof. When the 
declarations of scripture were urged on them, the reply was, 
that no proof could be given that these expressions were to be 
understood of a supernatural assistance, or, (to use the words of 
Henke, the Professor of Divinity at Helmstadt.) in any higher 
sense than the expressions of Cicero as to the inspiration of the 
poets, or those of Quintilian respecting Plato." — Rose's State of 
Protestantism in Germany, p. 106 and following second edition. 
Here Mr. Eose gives in a note the objections of Wegscheider 
against inspiration. We shall not transcribe this mixture of 
impiety and absurdity : but let it be observed, at the same 
time, that those who have rejected the infallible authority of 
the church, have deprived themselves of the great argument by 
which such objections are removed. And it is to furnish a con- 
firmation of this truth that we have here pointed to the progress 
of Protestant opinion on this question. 

It remains now that we answer a few objections — of which 
one is urged against our method of proof, the others against our 
doctrine of inspiration. 

First, we have to answer the trite objection which Pro- 
testants urge against our method of proceeding in this question. 
They say, that Catholics manifestly argue here in a vicious 
circle, proving the divinity of the scripture by the infallible 
authority of the church, and on the other hand proving this 
infallible authority of the church from the divine attestation of 
the scripture. 

Many answers may be given to this objection; the following 
one is abundantly sufficient : — In proof of the infallible autho- 
rity of the judgment of the church in matters of faith, we can 
appeal to the divine words of Christ himself, recorded in the 
New Testament ; but in thus proving the infallible authority of 
the church, we do not take into account that these words of 
Christ were committed to writing from inspiration. We rind 

G 



18 HOW IS INSPIRATION PROVED. 

these words — or the texts which contain them— to be numerous, 
clear, prominent; and we simply view them as recorded by the 
apostles in their character of honest and veracious historians. 
We see, therefore, that there is not a shadow of a vicious circle 
in this proceeding ; because, in proving the infallible authority 
of the church, we do not rest the proof in the least degree upon 
the inspiration of the writers of the scripture, but we rest it on 
the divine words of Christ, which we take as faithfully recorded 
by honest men ; and having thus arrived at the infallible autho- 
rity of the church, we prove from it that those books which 
we call the scriptures were written through divine inspiration. 

Consistently with our scope, we shall refer but briefly to 
the objections that are brought against the doctrine of in- 
spiration. 

First. It is said that some things are related in scripture 
which it was useless to mention. 

We answer, with St. Alphonsus Liguori — Dogmatic Work on 
the Council of Trent, on the 4th session, — " that although all the 
things that are contained in scripture are not equally useful, 
yet none of them is useless; for they contribute to the integrity 
of the narrative or serve for our instruction." 

Secondly. It is said that some things are related as un- 
certain, whereas, if the writers had been inspired, all doubts 
upon these matters would have been removed from their minds. 

To this we answer, that, in some cases, the Holy Ghost has 
not been pleased to reveal certain circumstances, but has sug-, 
gested these things to the writer, in a manner conformable to 
the common usage in relating such facts. 

Finally, if things are related in the scripture, which appear 
contrary to the divine commands, then we shall always find, 
either that the apparent meaning is not the real meaning of the 
passage, or, if it be, that the thing is not related with appro- 
bation. In this latter case, the writer is inspired merely to 
relate accurately what was said or done, but the Holy Ghost 
does not give any approbation to what was said or done. We 
may give as an example the mistaken views of the friends of 
Job, detailed in the book of Job. As we do not defend the verbal 
inspiration, we deem it superfluous to dwell upon objections 
which have no force unless in that hypothesis. 



ON THE DF.UTEROCANONICAL TORTIOUS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 19 



CHAPTER IY. 

WHAT ARE CALLED THE DEUTEROCANONICAL PORTIONS OF THE OLD 
TESTAMENT ARE PROPERLY PLACED ON THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE, 
AND ARE OF EQUAL AUTHORITY WITH THE PROTOCANONICAL 
PARTS OF SCRIPTURE. 

Here again we appeal to the great argument by which the inspi- 
ration of the scriptures is established ; that is, the authority of 
the church ; which not only establishes the inspiration of the 
scriptures, but also determines and establishes the canon of scrip« 
ture. In other words, resting upon that authority, we know, 
without the least danger of error, what are the component parts 
of the bible, that is to say, of that booh whose inspiration we are 
bound to admit. The canon set forth by the Council of Trent, 
and which contains those portions of the Old Testament here re- 
ferred to — comes before us with all the authority of the church's 
teaching : therefore, that is the true and proper canon of scrip- 
ture. This council was oecumenical, and has been confirmed by 
the bishop of Eome, the successor of him to whom it was said : 
" Peed my lambs— feed my sheep," — (John, xxi ; 15, 16, 17,) 
and there is nothing wanting to its decree on the canon to give 
it all the solemnity of a dogma of faith. All controversy, then, 
respecting the canon should cease ; for Christ promised infallibility 
to his church — as is proved by those scriptures which Pro- 
testants admit to be canonical, and by the clear testimony of tra- 
dition — and this promise would fail if the church could propose 
to her children as the inspired word of God the uninspired writ- 
ings of men. What, in such a case, would become of that saying 
of St. Augustine (Contra Epistolam Fundamenti,) — " but I would 
not believe the gospel, did not the authority of the church move 
me thereto." Not that the gospels and other books of sacred 
scripture have not their authority from divine inspiration ; but 
of the fact of their being inspired the church is to inform us. 
St. Irenseus, also Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria, appeal 
to the authority of the church to prove that there are but four 
genuine gospels, and that the others scattered about in their time, 
for the want of this authority, were not to .be received. We 
might, then, rest satisfied with this proof of the canon from the 
authority of the church ; for it is enough for us to know that the 
church has authoritatively determined the canon, and that she 
cannot have erred in doing so. 



20 



OX THE DEETEKOCAXOXICAL 



But we shall go farther. The church., in proposing dogmas 
of faith, has never, since the time of the apostles, based her de- 
cisions upon any new revelation from God. Her function, in 
this solemn teaching, is to interpret the voice of tradition ; and 
this she does unerringly, in virtue of the promises of her Divine 
Founder. Since, then, the decree of Trent respecting the canon 
of scripture must rest upon tradition, we shall examine briefly 
that tradition, as it regards that part of our canon which Protes- 
tants reject. The result of this examination shall be to confirm 
fully the church's decision — which we know, a priori, must be 
correct. 

As the enquiry here turns upon the deuterocanonical parts 
of the Old Testament, we may remind the reader that these have 
been described in the first chapter of this dissertation. 

First, then, it is no slight evidence of the tradition in favour 
of these books that we find each one of them quoted repeatedly, 
as divine scripture, by the very early fathers. The references to 
these numerous quotations may be seen in the Prceloquia of Eon- 
irerius, republished in the first volume of the Cursus Computus 
Sacrre Scripture, by Abbe Aligne, Paris, 1837. 

Secondly. In the Latin church, we find numerous monu- 
ments of a continued tradition in favour of the canonicalness of 
these books. Catalogues of the sacred books are given by Inno- 
cent I, — {Epistle to Exaperius, anno 402,) — and by St. Augus- 
tine, — {Libro 2do. de Doctrina Christiana, cap. 8, n. 13, anno 
400.) These catalogues agree perfectly with our canon: the 
only difference in form being, that they include Baruch under 
the name of Jeremias. The Council of Hyppo, held in 393 ; the 
third Council of Carthage, held about the year 397 ; and a coun- 
cil of seventy bishops, at Borne in 494, presided over by Pope 
Gelasius — all agree with St. Augustine and Innocent in their 
enumeration of the sacred books. This third Council of Carthage 
was a national council of Africa, approved of, at least, by St. Au- 
gustine, if he was not present at it, and presided over by Aure- 
lius, archbishop of Carthage. Cassiodorus, — {Lib. i, Divinarum 
Lebtionum,*) — in the sixth century, and St. Isidore of Seville, — 
{Lib. 6 to . Etymologiarum, cap. I mo.,) — in the early part of the 
seventh century, enumerate the books of scripture as they are 
upon our canon. Again — in the old Latin vulgate, the common 
version of the western church before the time of St. Jerome — 
these books are found interspersed among the other books; and 
when St. Jerome's translation was adopted by the church, care 
was taken that these books should not be disturbed from the 
places which they had previously occupied in the Latin bibles. 
There they continued— commented on from time to time, like 



TORTIOUS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 



21 



the other books — arranged in their order in the Roman missal 
and breviary like the others ; until — coming down to the time of 
Eugenius IV, we find this pope in his decree for the Armenians, 
setting forth the canon of Trent, one hundred years before the 
objections of the Protestants were made against it. 

Thirdly. We shall now pass to the Eastern churches. Cer- 
tainly the Greek church of these latter times places these books 
in its canon. All doubts upon this head have been removed by 
the councils of the modern Greek church, which were held for 
the purpose of disclaiming the doctrines of Cyril Lucar, patriarch 
of Constantinople, who, in the early part of the seventeenth cen- 
tury, endeavoured to bring over the Greek church to a union 
with the Calvinists. After the death of Cyril, his successor, Par- 
thenius, convened a council at Constantinople in 1642, in which 
Cyril and the Calvinists were condemned. Several of their er- 
rors are specified in the various decrees of the council ; and in 
the decree last in order they are condemned because they pre- 
sumed to expunge from the scriptures those books which the 
church in her synods had acknowledged as sacred. — See Uarduin 
Collectio Conciliorum, torn, xi, col. 175, Paris, 1715. The allu- 
sion of course is to those deuterocanonical books of the Old Testa- 
ment which the Calvinists held to be apocryphal. In the year 
1672 another council was held at Jerusalem, against the same 
errors, under the presidency of Dositheus, patriarch of Jerusa- 
lem. This council declares those books to be canonical — speci- 
fying them by name, and condemns Cyril Lucar, because — to 
use the words of the council — he foolishly, ignorantly, or rather 
maliciously called them apocryphal. — Uarduin, torn, xi, col. 258. 
Again, in 1671, seven archbishops of the Greek church drew up 
an attestation respecting the chief points of controversy between 
their church and the Calvinists ; in this attestation they approve 
of the condemnation of Cyril Lucar by the council of Constanti- 
nople under Parthenius ; and in the fourteenth article they de- 
clare "that the books of Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 
"Baruch, and the Machabees, make part of the Jioly scripture, and 
are not to be rejected as profane." This attestation was signed 
at Pera, 18th July, 1671, by Bartholomew of Heraclea, Jerom 
of Chalcedon, Methodius of Pisidia, Metrophanes of Cyzicum, 
Anthony of Athens, Joachim of Rhodes, Neophite of Mcomedia. 
The original of this attestation is preserved in that MS. collection 
in Paris, which contains the transactions of the Greek church in 
reference to Cyril Lucar, and which belonged formerly to the 
library of St. Germain des Pr^s. Such has been the doctrine of 
the Greek church from the earliest times. The Greek bible in 
common use in that church has always contained those books as 



22 



OX THE DEUTEROCANOtflCAL POETIOXS, ETC. 



they are found in the Latin vulgate. Indeed it was from this 
Greek bible that the Latin vulgate took them. It is well known 
that the Eestorians and Eutychians or Jacobites do not differ 
Irom the Greek church respecting the canon ; and as these sepa- 
rated from Catholic faith and unity so early as the fifth century, 
the authority of that canon must have been then firmly estab- 
lished. In a word, all the other Christians of the East agree 
with the Christians of the Greek church in the tradition respect- 
ing the canon . In proof of this assertion, we shall quote the 
words of one who is universally admitted to have been a most 
laborious critic, and eminently qualified by his knowledge of the 
languages, versions of the scripture, and theological writings of 
the Eastern Christians to pronounce upon this subject — we mean 
the Abbe Eenaudot. The Abbe Migne has conferred a great 
benefit on biblical literature, by publishing from the MSS. in 
the royal library at Paris, a series of dissertations in Latin, by 
Eenaudot, on the Eastern versions of the scripture. In one 01 
these dissertations, which is on the Arabic versions, Eenaudot 
takes occasion to say : — " After St. Jerome's version had become 

consecrated by the public use of the churches, that other 

version, which was according to the seventy interpreters, was 
not immediately nor entirely cast aside. Not only did the (Latin) 
church retain this latter version in the whole book of Psalms, 
but she took from it the books which were not extant in Hebrew. 
The Syrian church followed the .same discipline, even before the 
Syrian Christians were broken up into three divisions by the 
Nestorian and Jacobite heresies — a clear proof of a most ancient 
discipline ; since it survived the overthrow of the faith. All the 
Syrians read the scriptures as they are found in the translation 
made from the Hebrew at an early period ; they have, at the 
same time, after the example of the Latins, the books of Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus, Judith, the Machabees, and some other parts of 
the scripture, which are not found in the Hebrew copies." — 
Migne Carsus Completus Sacrcs Scriptures; torn, i, col. 634, Paris, 
1837. And again, in this same dissertation on the Arabic ver- 
sions, Eenaudot observes, after quoting two indexes or lists of 
the books of scripture as they are arranged in ancient Arabic 
bibles, " This index and the preceding one show, that those who 
translated the Hebrew books into Arabic, either from the original 
or from the ancient Syriac version, did not so adhere to the He- 
brew text as to conclude that the books which were not extant 
in Hebrew did not belong to the scripture, but that they did the 
same as the Eoman and all the Latin churches, as well as the 
Alexandrian and Syrian churches, viz., acknowledged those same 
books as legitimate and divine which were extant in Greek only ; 



REPLY TO TTIE OBJECTIONS OF PROTESTANTS. 



23 



so far were they from rejecting them as apocryphal — which the 
Protestants have done, against the example and laws of the an- 
cient church. And this is the constant tradition of all the East- 
ern churches ; and all those hooks, as well the books on the canon 
of the Jews, as those that are placed on the canon of the Catholic 
church, are cited by their theologians in the Arabic translation. " 
— Ibidem, col. 668, 669. At the council of Florence there was 
no discussion on the canon of scripture — a clear proof that the 
Greek and Latin churches were then unanimous upon this point. 
And when Eugenius IV, at that time, drew up his decree 
lor the instruction of the Armenians, in which he specified the 
books of scripture exactly as they were afterwards specified 
by the fathers of Trent, he speaks in such a way as to show 
clearly that it was an admitted and established truth in the 
church that all those books are of equal authority. The follow- 
ing are the words with which he prefaces the canon : — " Since, 
by the inspiration of the same Spirit the holy men of both testa- 
ments have spoken, whose books contained under the following 
titles the church receives and venerates." In a word, the canon 
was clearly determined by the unanimous consent of the Eastern 
and Western churches, centuries upon centuries before the coun- 
cil of Trent. No wonder, then, that it should have received the 
unanimous suffrages of the fathers of that council. In replying 
to the objections against our canon, we shall have occasion to de- 
velope more fully the testimony of tradition on this question. 



CHAPTEE Y. 

REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS OF PROTESTANTS AGAINST OUR CANON. 

First Objection, from the canon of the Jews. Second Objection, 
from the manner in which some of the fathers, and of the 
early Christian writers, speak of those boohs, ivhieh we call 
deutero canonical. 

The two objections here specified are the only ones that are 
urged against the admission into the canon of the deuterocanoni- 
cal portions of the Old Testament, considered in their entirety. 
Many other difficulties are brought against them by Protestants, 
founded upon their several contents, a reply to which properly 
belongs to the Special Introduction to the boohs of the Old Testa- 
ment. We shall just observe here — respecting those difficulties 
taken from the contents of the books — that they are not more 
plausible than those which the infidels have urged against the 
other books, taken from their contents. Such objections, then, 



24 



REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS 



come with a bad grace from Protestants ; and with a special in- 
consistency from Anglicans ; for, if those difficulties were unan- 
swerable, the books could not be proposed to be read for example 
of life and instruction of manners. It is quite certain that these 
difficulties are merely apparent, and vanish upon a thorough ex- 
amination of the text, as has been over and over again demon- 
strated by Catholic commentators. 

~We come now to the two leading objections of Protestants, 
by each of which they imagine that they can overturn at once 
the claim of all those books to be considered canonical scripture. 
The first of these — taken from the Hebrew canon — may be thus 
proposed : — 

Objection. The Jews had a canon of scripture made by 
Esdras and the great council — on it were not placed any of the 
books excluded from the canon by Protestants. JSow the autho- 
rity of the Jewish church ought to be paramount on a question 
respecting the authority of the books of the Old Testament, par- 
ticularly with those who admit the infallibility of that church. 
That the Jews did not place these books on the canon appears 
from the testimony of the fathers, and of Josephus, who testifies 
that these books were not held in the same esteem as the others, 
because there had been no certain succession of prophets from 
the time of Artaxerxes, that is, from the time of Esdras. 

Answer. — First. T7c admit that these books were not on 
the canon of the Hebreic Jews. At the time of our Redeemer's 
coming, and for some time previously, the Jews were divided 
into two classes : first, the Hebrew Jews — these were the Jews 
of Palestine ; so called, because they read the scripture in Hebrew 
in the synagogues, and spoke the Syro-Chaldaic, which was then 
commonly called the Hebrew tongue. Besides these, there was 
another large class of Jews, known by the name of Hellenists. 
They were the Jews of the dispersion — and received the appella- 
tion of Hellenists from the prevalence of the Greek language in 
the countries in which they resided. They, read the scriptures 
in the Septuagint version — and they received those deuterocano- 
nical books, as well as the other parts of scripture. It was from 
the hands of the Hellenist Jews that the books in question passed 
into the possession of the church.* 

Second. Let it be granted that Esdras, together with the 
great council or important sanhedrin of his time drew up a canon 
of scripture — yet this is not altogether so clear, as Richard Simon 
shows in his Critical History of the Old Testament, and Bergier 
in his Theological Dictionary (word ca?ion). And besides, the 

* See more on the Hellenist Jews in the dissertation on the version o 
the Seventy. 



OF PROTESTANTS. 



25 



labours of Esdras about the scripture must have concluded before 
the books of Nehemias and Malachy could have been added to 
the canon. 

Third. We admit the infallibility of the Jewish church — 
yet this is by no means so certain as is the doctrine of the infal- 
libility of the Christian church. In one word — in order to place 
the objection in as strong a light as an adversary can, with any 
show of reason, set it forth, we do admit, for argument's sake, 
that an infallible tribunal in the Jewish church, at or about the 
time of Esdras, drew up a canon of scripture, upon which all 
these deuterocanonical books were omitted. After all, what does 
this prove against us ? Our proof of the canon is based upon the 
tradition of the Christian church, and hence our proof involves 
this truth, viz., that the doctrine of the inspiration of all these 
books makes a part of the deposit of Christian faith communi- 
cated to the church by Christ and his apostles. Such being the 
nature of the proof, there is nothing in the objection here pro- 
posed calculated to disturb it. If our adversaries could prove 
that the Jewish church pronounced that these books were not in- 
spired, then indeed any one who admits — as I do- — the infallibi- 
lity of that church, would find himself in a dilemma ; but this 
assertion they can by no means prove. ~No : the Hebrew church 
merely did not formally declare in favour of their inspiration. 
These books were held in high esteem by all the Jews. Thus, 
J osephus quotes from the book of Ecclesiasticus, in his Apology 
against Appion. In the Rabbinical writings these books are 
occasionally cited. Maimonides, in his Preface on the Penta- 
teuch, quotes a book which he calls the great wisdom, and what 
he introduces of it agrees with our book of "Wisdom. — .Richard 
Simon, Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament, liv. i, chap. 8. 
p. 56, Rotterdam edition. In a word, it is clear that no proof 
exists of the formal rejection of these books by the Jewish church. 
Very probable reasons are assigned for their omission on the Jew- 
ish canon, taken from — the time of their appearing — the language 
in which they were written — or the uncertainty about the author. 
But this much is quite certain, that the objection will have no 
weight unless our adversaries prove — either that these books were 
formally rejected as uninspired by the Jewish church ; or that the 
want of a formal approval of them by the Jewish church ought to 
be considered a conclusive argument against their inspiration. 
£Tow neither of these assertions admits of even a shadow of proof. 
The fathers show us what they thought of this difficulty ; admit- 
ting on one hand the omission of the books on the Hebrew canon, 
but asserting on the other the power of the church to place them 
on the canon. To this effect are the words of St. Jerome, where 



26 



REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS 



he tells us that he was informed that the council of Mce had 
reckoned the book of Judith in the number of the sacred scrip- 
tures. " Hune librum Synodus Mesena in numero sanctarum 
scrip turarum legitur computasse." — Prcefatio in Judith. It mat- 
ters not here, as far as our argument is concerned, whether or 
not St. J erome really believed that the council of Mce had pro- 
nounced on the canonicalness of Judith, when he says legitur : 
it is enough for us that he speaks in such a way as to show that 
he considered the council possessed of sufficient authority to pro- 
nounce upon the point, and that, if it did pronounce, then the 
claim of Judith to be reckoned among the sacred scriptures could 
be no longer contested. When St. Augustine formed that collec- 
tion of extracts from the sacred scriptures to which he gave the 
name of Speculum, he did not pass over these books, as if they 
were not sacred scripture ; and the reason which he alleges is, 
that the church of Christ received them, although the Jews had 
not received them. " Mm sunt omittendi et hi libri quos quidem 
ante Salvatoris adventum constat esse conscriptos ; sed eos non 
receptos a Judaeis recepit tamen ejusdem Salvatoris ecclesia." 
In another place St. Augustine thus expresses himself: " Erom 
the rebuilding of the temple down to Aristobulus, the computa- 
tion of time is not found in the holy scriptures which are called 
canonical, but elsewhere, as in the books of the Machabees, 
which, although they are not received by the Jews as canonical, 
are acknowledged as such by the church." — De civitate Dei, lib. 
xviii, o. 36. This testimony of St. Augustine is very remarka- 
ble — showing at once the faith of the church respecting the book 
of Machabees, and furnishing a proof of the distinction which the 
ancients, and after them several writers of the middle ages, made 
between the canon of the Jews and that of the church. Eor this 
holy doctor, after having said that the books of the Machabees 
are not of the number of the canonical books, adds, two lines 
after, that the church receives them as canonical, although the 
Jews did not allow them the same authority. This distinction 
will serve to explain Origen, St. Jerome, and some other ecclesi- 
astical writers, who, in giving the catalogue of the canonical 
books, have excluded from it these books of the Machabees, and 
some of the other deuterocanonical books, which, nevertheless, 
they have cited as divine scripture in their commentaries and 
other works. In tine, St. Isidore of Seville, ( Origin, seu Ety- 
molog. lib. vi), testifies that " though the church of the Jews 
places these books among the Apocrypha, the church of Christ 
teaches them, and honours them as divine." It must be observed 
that it does not follow from St. Isidore's using the word Apocry- 
pha, that he was of opinion that the Jewish church looked upon 



OF PROTESTANTS. 



27 



these books as unworthy of credit, for the term has been fre- 
quently used to designate books or writings the authority of 
which is not manifest, and such is the original signification of the 
word. And it is only in this latter sense that these books were 
regarded as apocryphal by any section of the Jews — as Eichard 
Simon observes : "Les Eabbins rneme citent quelquefois ces livres : 
do sorte que les Juifs ne les ont jamais rejette entierement, mais 
illes ont seulement considered comme des ouvrages Apocryphes, 
c'est-a-dire, caches et inconnus, parce qu'ils n'avoient point et6 
publies par l'autorite du sanhedrim" — Histoire Critique du Vieux 
Testament, liv. i> cap. 8, p. 57. 

There still remains another objection, which is urged by Pro- 
testants against the admission into the canon of any of those deu- 
terocanonical portions of the Old Testament, and this is the 
difficulty upon which they principally insist. It may be thus 
set forth. If the doctrine of the inspiration of these books had 
been delivered to the church by Christ or his apostles, so many 
of the fathers and ecclesiastical writers in the early times of the 
church would not have excluded them from the canon. Eut 
many of these have excluded them ; therefore, &c. In proof of 
the assertion that several of the fathers and others in the primi- 
tive church doubted at least, the inspiration of these books, and 
excluded them from the canon — they refer to St. Athanasius in 
his Synopsis of the Eooks of Scripture ; Origen, as quoted by 
Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History ; Melito, Eishop of Sardis, 
quoted by the same historian, and Eusebius himself ; St. Gre- 
gory Nazianzen, in his poem on the Genuine Scriptures ; Eufinus, 
in his Exposition of the Symbol ; St. John Damascen ; but, above 
all the ancients, St. Jerome is appealed to, as having, say they, 
fully expressed the Anglican view of this question, and therefore 
they have introduced his words into the Anglican Article on the 
Sacred Scriptures. They refer also to the Council of Laodicea, 
held in the year 364. If we add that a few more ancient writers 
are quoted by our opponents, then all will be said which they 
can put forward in their appeal to tradition on the question of 
the canon. * In reply, we assert that a thorough examination of 
the character of the difficulty here put forward will show, that 
it ought not to be allowed to weigh even for a moment against 
our proof of the canon. In the first place let it be observed that 

* Any one who wishes to see a full list of the ancient authorities on 
both sides, as well of those who appear to be against, as of those who are in 
favour of the canonicalness of these hooks, may consult the Prccloquia of 
Bonfrerius, in the first volume of the Cursus Completus Sacra Scriptures, 
published by Abbe Migne. Bonfrerius treats the question with a special 
reference to each of the deuterocanonical books in particular. 



28 



REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS 



not one ancient authority has defended the Protestant canon pre- 
cisely, but every one whose testimony is cited in favour of that 
canon, when giving the catalogue of canonical books, either omits 
some portion of scripture which Protestants receive, or mentions 
as canonical some portion which they reject. Thus the Council 
of Laodicea omits the Apocalypse and includes Baruch. — Cabas- 
sutius Notitia Ecclesiastica. Editio iv, Lugdini, p. 158. Melito 
omits Esther and mentions "Wisdom. St. Athanasius omits Esther 
whilst he asserts the inspiration of the History of Susanna in the 
Book of Daniel, and so of the others. Secondly. The ancient 
authorities cited by the opponents of our canon have so explained 
themselves on this subject as to prove that, if they lived now, 
they would be clearly and explicitly with us — that is to say, 
either by their manner of speaking, or by putting on their canon 
some portion of scripture omitted on the Hebrew canon, they 
show that they did not consider the omission of a book on that 
Jewish canon to be conclusive against its inspiration, but that 
they considered it to be the province of the church to direct us 
in this matter. Thirdly. These doubts cannot be traced farther 
back in the church than the time of Melito, Bishop of Sardis, 
about the year 160 or 170. He was the first to refer to the He- 
brew canon in this matter. Before his time those very ancient 
writers, St. Barnabas, St. Clement of Borne, St. Irenseus, use 
these books like the other scriptures, which shows what was the 
apostolic tradition on the subject. Fourthly. It is exceedingly 
probable that almost all those fathers and ancient Christian wri- 
ters, who excluded these books from the canon, did not intend to 
throw the least doubt upon their inspiration, but merely to make 
known to their readers what were the books of the Old Testa- 
ment, the canonical authority of which was equally admitted by 
Jews and Christians, and consequently what were the books from 
which arguments might be drawn in the controversies with the 
Jews. For, in truth, this appears to be the only way of reconcil- 
ing these writers with themselves, since we find these very wri- 
ters, in their commentaries and other works, quoting these books 
as scripture in the same way as they quote the other books. 
Thus Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Gregory JNazianzen, and even 
St. Jerome. The passages of their works have been often refer- 
red to, and may be seen in any of our theologians — Bonfrerius, 
already mentioned, Kenrick (Tract, Be Verio Dei Scripto de 
Canone Seriptu), &c. Indeed, that the ancient fathers have 
often quoted these books along with the other scriptures is not 
denied even by Protestants. Thus Cosin, in his Scholiastical 
History of the Canon, section 77, says, in express terms, " In 
the meanwhile we deny not, but that the ancient fathers have 



OF PEOTESTANTS. 



29 



often cited these contro versed books, some under the name of di- 
vine scriptures, and others under the title of prophetical writings?'' 
And in other parts of his work, this determined opponent of the 
Canon of Trent does not deny the same thing even of those 
fathers who are expressly quoted by Protestants for their view of 
the canon. To be sure Cosin contends, that although the fathers 
cited these books as divine scriptures, and prophetical writings, 
they did not cite them as inspired scripture. He appears to 
think that this is quite clear, at least with regard to those fathers 
who, in other parts of their works, have positively excluded these 
books from the canon. But we reply, that in the first place, 
respecting those fathers who have cited the books as divine scrip- 
tures and prophetical writings, without any qualification either 
in the place in which they are cited, or in any other part of their 
writings, it is a most gratuitous and unwarrantable assertion to 
make, that they did not intend to designate inspired writings by 
such appellations — the first being the proper and usual name of 
the inspired writings; the second being one of the aptest names 
that could be used to convey the idea of inspiration in those wri- 
tings. And seeing that those fathers, who, in other parts of their 
works have excluded these books from the canon, have neverthe- 
less cited them by the same appellations of divine scriptures and 
prophetical writings, it ought to be presumed that they, too, in- 
tended, by such names, to designate inspired scripture ; and that, 
therefore, in excluding the books from the canon, in other parts 
of their works, they did not intend to imply that they them- 
selves doubted of their inspiration, but that they had not been 
placed upon the canon by the Jews ; and that, consequently, in 
arguing with the Jews, or with heretics, who would be disposed 
to urge the authority of the Jews against these books, they were 
not so available as the other books of the Old Testament. Just 
now-a-days, when Catholic theologians defend, against Protest- 
ants, the practice of praying for the dead from the 2nd book of 
Machabees, where it is said, ; that ' ' it is a holy and wholesome 
thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from 
sins.'' — 2 Mac. xii, 46, — they fail not to observe, that they do 
not argue from this as inspired scripture — because the adversa- 
ries do not admit it for such — but as an authentic record of the 
belief of the Jewish church in the time of the Machabees. Yet 
these Catholic theologians believe firmly in the inspiration of the 
book of Machabees. What we have here said will furnish a fair 
explanation of the meaning of Kufinus, when he terms these books 
ecclesiastical. That is to say, they ure books which the church 
receives as inspired, although they were not placed upon the 
canon of scripture by several outside the church ; who admitted 



30 



REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS 



the inspiration of the other books of the Old Testament. 
The meaning of St. Jerome also becomes plain in those words, 
quoted in the Anglican article — thus, " The church does not 
apply time hooks to establish any doctrine" because so many of 
those, who were outside of the church, to whom it was necessary 
to prove the church's doctrine, did not admit the canonical autho- 
rity of these books. But the church, holding, as she does, the 
inspiration of these books, reads them for her own children — the 
domestics of the faith — who being already convinced of the truth 
of all the doctrine which she teaches, have only to seek in the 
scriptures example of life and instruction of manners. Indeed, 
that we have here rightly explained the meaning both of St. 
Jerome and Eufinus may be clearly enough learned from them- 
selves. Eufinus urged it as a charge against St. Jerome, that 
he had " ventured to pillage the deposit of the Holy Ghost, by 
taking away from the divine instrument, which the apostles 
delivered to" the churches." He offers in proof of this charge his 
treatment of the book of Daniel. He says, 'Tor all that history 
of Susanna, which afforded an example of chastity to the 
churches of God, was cut off by him and cast aside. The Hymn 
of the Three Youths, which is sung in the church of God, has 
been altogether removed from its place by him."* To this charge 
St. Jerome replies, " As to what I state respecting the objections 
of the Hebrews against the history of Susanna, and the Hymn of 

the Three Youths which are not found in the Hebrew; he who 

accuses me proves himself a foolish calumniator. For it was not 
what I myself thought, but what they are wont to say against 
us, that I explained."! If Eufinus had himself denied the rank 
of inspired scripture to the deuterocanonical part of Daniel, he 
would never have brought this charge against St. Jerome ; whilst 
St. Jerome, in his defence, gives us the key to the* understanding 
of what he said, apparently against that part of the book, viz., 
that he spoke the sentiments of the Hebrews, not his own. JSow 

* He accuses St. Jerome of presuming " Instrumentum divimim quod 
Apostoli Ecclesiis tradiderunt, et depositum Sancti Spiritus compilare. . ! . 
Nam omnis ilia historia de Susanna, quae castitatis exemplum praebebat 
Ecclesiis Dei, ab ipso abscissa est et abjecta atque posthabita. Trium 
puerorum hymnus qui maxime diebus solenrnibus in Ecclesia Dei canitur 
ab isto e loco suo penitus erasus est." — Eufin. Apolog. in Hieromy, lib. 
2do. In editione operum St. Hieromy, per Martianay, torn, iv, col. 446. 

+ " Quod autem refero, quid adversus Susannas historiam, et hymnum 
trium puerorum .... quae in volumine Febraico non habentur, Hebraei 
soleant dicere ; qui me criminatur, stultum se sycophantam probat. is on 
enim quid ipse sentirem sed quid illi contra nos dicere soleant explicavi." 

Liber secundus contra Eufmum, in editione per Martianay, operum St 

Hieronymi, torn, iv, col. 431. 



OF PROTESTANTS. 



31 



Protestants admit that as much difficulty lies against this part of 
Daniel as against any other portion of the Old Testament which 
they exclude from the canon. They will also easily admit that 
if the doubts of Kufinus and St. Jerome can be explained away, 
so can the doubts of almost all the other ancient Christian 
writers respecting these books. Finally. Let it be admitted, 
however, that some in the early ages of the church doubted of 
the inspiration of these books — that even all those who are cited 
by the opponents of our canon doubted, still the belief in their 
inspiration was at all times general in the church, so that when 
the time came round to settle the question of the canon ultimately 
by a solemn definition, the church could no more mistake the 
meaning of tradition on this subject than she could on other 
matters which she has defined, and even according to Protestants, 
properly defined, the doubts of some in former times notwith- 
standing. That the belief in the inspiration of these books was 
at all times general in the church, appears from our proof of the 
Catholic canon. If the church could be deterred, by the doubts 
of some, from defining that a certain doctrine belonged to the 
deposit of faith, and was handed clown by tradition from the 
time of her foundation by Christ and his apostles, then she would 
never have defined that baptism conferred by heretics is valid, 
seeing the opposition which that doctrine met with, on the part 
of some, in the days of St. Cyprian. But what is more to the 
purpose here, the church had as much reason to place these 
books on the canon as she had to put the deuterocanonical parts 
of the ]\ T ew Testament on that canon. Protestants are incon- 
sistent in receiving the entire of our New Testament, and 
objecting to those deuterocanonical parts of the Old. In the 
first place, the sixth article of the Anglican church contradicts 
itself, for it says, in one place, " In the name of the holy scrip- 
ture we do understand these canonical books of the Old and New 
Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the 
church." And in a following part it says, " All the books of the 
New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, 
and account them canonical." Now, it is beyond all question 
that about the deuterocanonical parts of the New Testament, 
which are received by Protestants, there were some doubts in 
the early ages of the church, and doubts as widely spread at 
least as those which regarded the parts of the Old Testament 
under discussion. Take, for example, the Epistle of St. Paul to 
the Hebrews in the time of St. Jerome, and the Apocalypse in 
the time of the Council of Laodicea, which was held in the fourth 
century 

And are not our adversaries very inconsistent in admitting one 



32 



KEPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS 



class of deuterocanonical books and rejecting the other? It is 
to no purpose to say that the authority of the Hebrew canon is 
opposed to the books which they reject, for we have disposed of 
that difficulty already, and the whole question here turns upon 
the testimony of Christian tradition, which favours one class as 
much as the other. We receive into the canon the Epistle of 
St. Paul to the Hebrews, the Apocalypse, and all the other 
deuterocanonical parts of the New Testament ; and this we do, 
influenced precisely by Christian tradition and the authority of 
the church, there being no other grounds which would justify 
us in looking on them as sacred scripture ; but then we do not 
disparage our authorities by accepting their testimony in favour 
of this class of books in the New Testament, and rejecting their 
testimony equally given in favour of the deuterocanonical parts 
of the Old Testament. The doubts of some have never inter- 
rupted the general current of tradition in favour of our canon. 
The proof of this, which we have already adduced, shall acquire 
an additional force in our eyes, if we consider the nature of the 
testimony, which every witness to our canon, through all past 
ages, gives. Every council and every father and writer that has 
placed the deuterocanonical books upon the canon, must have 
been fully persuaded of their inspiration. Every one sees how 
injuriously towards the other scriptures they would act, who 
would raise to a level with them a book or writing of whose 
inspiration they entertained any doubt. How, then, were they 
persuaded of their inspiration ? By being persuaded that such 
was the tradition of the church. For it was not in consequence 
of the impressions which they themselves conceived from reading 
the books, nor was it resting upon any special revelation which 
they received on the subject, that these believed in their inspira- 
tion. Hence each of our testimonies embodies in itself numerous 
other testimonies. This follows from the way in which they 
arrived at the conclusion that these books were inspired— that 
way, I repeat it, being the study of the church's tradition on the 
subject — a way so necessary that the first Council of Toledo, 
held about the year 400, among other anathematisms, published 
the following, " If any one shall say, or believe, that other scrip- 
tures besides those which the Catholic church receives are to be 
held in authority, or to be venerated, let him be anathema."* 

To sum up all in one word, the decision of the church, whilst 
it brings to the Catholic the fullest conviction as to what he 
ought to believe to be canonical scripture, is, at the same time, 

* " Si quis dixerit vel crediderit alias scrip turas, prseter quas Ecclesia" 
Catholica recipit, in auctoritate habendas, vel esse venerandas, anathema 
sit."— Labbe, torn, di, col. 1476. Yenice edition, 1728. 



OF rilOTESTANTS. 



33 



seen to rest upon arguments which no effort of its opponents can 
overthrow. 

It would be strange, on the other hand, if those who have 
rejected the church's authority should follow any uniform rule 
in pronouncing on the canon of scripture ; and, in point of fact, 
Protestants have not exhibited greater unanimity or uniformity 
of belief on this matter than on several others. Thus, they have 
not always agreed in receiving the deuterocanonical parts of the 
New Testament. Luther held the Epistle of St. James in no 
estimation, characterising it as an epistle of straw. Scarcely 
more favourable was the opinion which he entertained of the 
Apocalypse, as appears from the preface to his German transla- 
tion of this book. Nor did Luther stand alone in these views. 
"We find Michaelis justifying his own doubts about the inspira- 
tion of the Apocalypse, by a reference to Luther. " If Luther," 
he says, * 4 the author of our reformation, thought and acted in 
this manner, and the divines of the two last centuries still con- 
tinued, without incurring the charge of heresy (observe), to print 
Luther's preface to the Apocalypse in the editions of the Ger- 
man bible, of which they had the superintendence, surely no one 
of the present age ought to censure a writer for the avowal of 
similar doubts." — Marsh's Translation of Michaelis 1 Introduction 
to the New Testament. ^.th edition, vol. iv, p. 459. The Ration- 
alists, those truly consistent Protestants, who have discussed the 
question of inspiration with so much irreverence, have treated 
with equal disregard the Christian tradition respecting the canon, 
even that part of the canon which the Protestants of these coun- 
tries receive. Here we again quote from Mr. Eose, who says, 
" First, I may mention that by many of those who undertook to 
inquire into the authenticity and genuineness of the books of 
scripture, it was determined that a great part of these books 
were spurious, suppositious, and interpolated ; that the gospels 
did not proceed from the authors whose names they bore, or at 
least that those authors had little concern in them, and that 
many of the epistles likewise were spurious." — State of Protes- 
tantism in Germany. 2nd edition, p. 99. This is what comes of 
detaching one's- self from the anchor of the church's authority, 
and putting to sea under the guidance of private judgment, to be 
driven about by every wind of doctrine. — Ephesians, w,Jl4. 



34 



HISTORICAL NOTICE OF THE FORM 



DISSERTATION II. 



HISTORICAL NOTICE OE THE EORM OE THE SACRED BOOKS DIVISIONS 

AND MARES OE DISTINCTION OCTJRRING IN THEM. 

We purpose, in this dissertation, to notice many things, which 
it will be useful to know before coming to the question, respect- 
ing the present state of the original texts. And, indeed, what 
knowledge can be either useless or uninteresting to the Christian, 
that has for its object anything relating to the sacred books ? 

Eirst. To decide in what language each book of the scrip- 
tures was written, belongs properly to the special introduction to 
the special books. For the present let it suffice to state, that the 
following languages, or idioms, embrace all that have been used 
in the original composition of the bible, viz., Hebrew, Chaldaic, 
Syro-Chaldaic, aud Greek. Of the Old Testament, the greater 
part was written in Hebrew. Chaldaic was used in the following 
parts :— in the eleventh verse of the tenth chapter of the prophet 
Jeremias, in a great part of Daniel and Esdras, and in the books 
of Tobias and Judith throughout. In Greek was written origin- 
ally the second book of Machabees, and the book of Wisdom. 
Almost all the !New Testament was written in Greek. Syro- 
Chaldaic was the original of the gospel of St. Matthew, and, 
according to many, of the epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. 

Second. The alphabetical characters used by the sacred 
writers were, for the books written in Hebrew — at least those 
written before the Babylonian captivity — not the characters found 
in our present Hebrew bibles, which are in truth the Chaldaic 
characters, but such as are now to be found in the Samaritan 
Pentateuch, similar to the old Phenician character. It has been 
commonly supposed that the characters used in our Hebrew 
bibles now, were substituted for the others immediately after 
the captivity, when the ancient Hebrew ceased to be spoken by 
the Jews. Modern critics, however, deny that this could have 
been the case, inasmuch as the old Hebrew characters have been 
used upon coins several centuries after the return from captivity ; 
and they therefore contend that the substitution of the one cha- 
racter for the other was gradually introduced, since, indeed, both 
the gradual departure from the old Hebrew, and the gradual 



OF THE SACRED LOOKS. 



approximation to the Chaldaic character, appear to be clearly 
marked in the inscriptions on these coins, as they succeed each 
other in point of time. 

The Chaldaic character is well known. As we have observed, 
it supplanted the Hebrew characters in those books which were 
originally written in Hebrew. It was used also in Syro-Chaldaic 
writing. This latter dialect, which was in common use among 
the Jews of Palestine when Christ came, and for a considerable 
period before, varied from the Chaldaic by the admixture of 
several Syriac words. 

In reference to the Greek scriptures, it is to be observed that 
Greek manuscripts were usually written in capital or uncial 
letters down to the seventh century of the Christian era, and, 
for the most part, even to the eighth. It was towards the close 
of the tenth century that the small or cursive letters were 
generally adopted. To notice the various languages into which 
the scriptures have been translated belongs to another place. 

Third. As to the material, upon which the inspired word 
was first inscribed, or which was afterwards used in copying that 
word, we have to observe that such writing material must have 
been different at different times. Perhaps, in the history of 
writing, the most ancient practice was to carve the letters on 
stone. Josephus informs us that the descendants of Seth — 
knowing that a general destruction of the things on the face of 
the earth was twice to be expected, first by water and then by 
fire, wrote their discoveries in astronomy on two pillars ; one of 
stone, to withstand the water, the other of brick, to resist the 
fire. — (Anttq. i, 3.) The law was delivered to Moses on Mount 
Sinai written on tables of stone. Although tablets of stone or 
any such material could never have been conveniently used in the 
formation of a book as we understand the word, yet writing upon 
stone and brick was, as early as the time of Moses, carried to an 
extent which modern discoveries have shown to be perfectly sur- 
prising. We allude to the discoveries amid the monuments of 
Egypt, Eabylonia, Persepolis, and Assyria. When wood and 
other more pliable but less durable materials came into use, the 
practice of writing upon stone or brick by no means ceased. 
These durable materials were particularly used for the writing 
of laws, treaties, alliances, and the public archives of kingdoms. 
One of the most recent discoveries of Mr. Layard amicl the ruins 
at Kouyunjik (the ancient JNmive), was a large room filled with 
what appeared to be the archives of the Assyrian empire, ranged 
in successive tablets of terra cotta, the writings being quite 
perfect. They were piled in huge heaps from the floor to the 
ceiling. Plates, or tablets of lead and copper, were also used 



36 



HISTOEICAL NOTICE OF THE FORM 



for such public records as we here speak of. Down to a com- 
paratively late period, it was a frequent custom to inscribe trea- 
ties and alliances on copper. — (See 2 Maeh., :civ.) Tablets of 
lead afforded greater facility for carving the letters, and were, 
no doubt, frequently used in those ancient times. ^Ve are told 
that the works of Hesiod were first engraved on plates of lead, 
and laid up in the temple of the Muses in Eceotia. — (See Calmet, 
Dissertation sur la Matiere et la Forme de les Livres Anciens.) 
Job speaks of a book formed of plates or tablets of lead. " ^Vho 
will °;rant me that my words mav be written ? AVho will errant 
me that they may be marked down in a book with an iron pen 
and in a plate of lead, or else be graven with an instrument in 
flint-stone?" — (Job, xiv. y 23, 24.) One is forcibly reminded of 
those words of Job, when he reads of the vast number of inscrip- 
tions graven upon the slabs of silicious basalt that in recent 
times have been dug up from the ruins of the ancient Mnive. 
"Wood, by reason of the comparatively great facility which it 
offered tor carving or engraving, must have been much used as 
a writing material in those early times. And for several ages 
after other materials of a pliable kind became abundant, wooden 
tablets continued to be much used, particularly in the ordinary 
transactions of life. For the greater facility of writing, it was 
usual to overlay these tablets with wax. Here the graving 
instrument or iron pen mentioned by holy Job — afterwards 
called Stylus by the Eomans — had less difficulty in inscribing 
the letters, and moreover it was easy to efface what was written, 
by means of the flat top of the stylus. It was on a tablet of 
tiiis kind that the father of the Baptist wrote the name which 
his son should be called. — {Luke, i, 63.) The well-known use 
of these tablets among the Hebrews illustrates several ex- 
pressions familiar to the sacred volume, such as "tablets of 
the heart," and many others. There is one very remarkable 
allusion to this system of writing, in the fourth book of Kings 
(xxi, 13), where God says of Jerusalem, as the vulgate renders 
it. •• Delens vertani et ducam crebrius stylum super faciem ejus." 
•■' Blotting it out, I shall turn the pen and draw it frequently 
over its {the city's) face." The letters were at first written in 
lines running from the right hand to the left, and this manner 
of writing obtained among the Hebrews, Egyptians, Assyrians, 
Phenicians, and Arabians ; and. from some very old inscriptions, 
it appears to have prevailed at one period among the Greeks also. 
Afterwards the Greeks adopted the method of making the lines 
irom the right to the left, and then from the left to the right 
again, which manner of writing was called by them boustrophe- 
don, from its similarity to the way in which furrows are made 



OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 



by oxen in ploughing. It was soon discovered, however, by the 
Greeks, that the motion of the hand from left to right was more 
commodious, and thenceforward the method of writing in that 
direction prevailed among them, and throughout Europe. To 
form a book of wooden tablets, a number of them were connected 
together by means of a string, or in some such way. A book 
thus formed was called by the Latins caudex, or codex, from its 
resemblance to the stump or stock of a tree. 

When Calmet wrote his dissertation on the matter and form 
of the boohs of the ancients, it was commonly believed that Moses, 
in the Pentateuch, wherever he mentions booh — in Hebrew 
sepher — always designates a tablet, or collection of tablets, such 
as we have now described, and never any pliable material, such 
as would be used in forming the volume, or roll, called in Hebrew 
megillah, a word that never occurs in the books of Moses. But 
later investigations have led to the abandonment of this opinion. 
Hengstenberg, in his ' ' Dissertation on the genuineness of the 
Pentateuch," in the chapter " on the genuineness of the Penta- 
teuch in relation to the art of writing among the Hebrews, " 
shows that sepher may well designate a pliable matter — such as the 
papyrus, byssus, skins of animals — and he shows, that there is 
no reason for supposing that these, considered as writing mate- 
rials, do not date as far back as the time of Moses. In point of 
fact, amidst the monuments of ancient Egypt, documents have 
been found written on the papyrus, or byblus, as far back, at 
least, as the days of the Hebrew legislator. 

For the volume, or roll-form, of books, divers materials have 
been used, beginning, perhaps, with the leaves of trees, as the 
most simple. Thus, Virgil represents the sybil as inscribing her 
prophecies on leaves. The skins of animals were easily prepared 
for the purpose of which we speak, and, consequently, must 
have been in early use, as a writing material. So was the inner 
bark of certain trees ; and hence it is that liber, which signifies 
the inner bark of a tree, came to designate a book among the 
Romans. Linen, or byssus, was used as a writing material by 
the Egyptians from a very early period, as was also the papyrus, 
or byblus — a kind of bulrush, which grew chiefly in Egypt, about 
the banks of the Nile. It has been stated by many, that the use 
of the papyrus commenced about the time of Alexander the 
Great (about 340 years before the Christian era ;) but, as it has 
been already observed, recent discoveries have rendered this opi- 
nion altogether untenable. Pliny, from whom the statement 
was first borrowed, is now admitted to have erred on the point, 
unless he be understood as speaking of a certain improved mode 
of preparing the papyrus, introduced in the time of Alexander. 



HISTORICAL NOTICE OP THE FOEM 



It continued to be used down to the tenth century even in Eu- 
rope, although very rarely for a considerable time before that. 
Parchment, and vellum, which is but a finer kind of it, was intro- 
duced about 250 years before Christ, according to the common 
opinion, which ascribes its invention to Eumenes, Xing of Per- 
gamos. Prom Pergamos, the Romans gave it the name of perga- 
mena. Paper made from cotton has been in use, it is supposed, 
from the tenth century, but very generally from the twelfth. 
Paper, manufactured from linen, has been in use about 500 years 
among us : it was said, that it was used at a much earlier period 
by the Chinese. To a book formed of some pliable material, the 
name volume was given, a name that still continues to be applied 
to bocks, notwithstanding the shape which they have, for a long 
time past assumed, so different from what was at first designated 
by the volume. The volume, properly so called, was rolled on a 
stick, the end of which, from its central position, was called urn- 
bilious (the navel) by the Romans. The conclusion of the wri- 
ting was the first part attached to the stick, on which the volume 
was rolled, that thus any one taking it up might first unrol the 
beginning of the book ; and hence, when one had arrived at that 
part of the volume, which was first attached, or to be attached 
to the. stick, he had finished his work either in reading or wri- 
ting the volume. This explains that figurative expression which 
was in use among the Romans, ad umbilicum adducere, as in 
Horace {Mpidon Liber. Od. 14.) — " Inceptos, olim promissum 
carmen, iambos, ad umbilicum adducere." 

"When a work was too large to be conveniently made into one 
roll, then it was formed into separate rolls, styled volumes, first, 
second, &c, and this mode of speaking still continues, although 
tome — which means a division — is used sometimes in the same 
sense as volume, but chiefly in its Latin form, by those who 
write in Latin. The volume had the writing generally but on 
one side, which the Romans called pagina. In some printed 
books, we still find allusions to the ancient volume in such words 
as the following, at the end of certain divisions : explicit liber 
primus, liber secundus, Sfc, which refer to the unfolding, or expli- 
cation, of the volume. Por all such materials as were adapted 
to the volume-form, it was not the stylus that was used to in- 
scribe the letters, but the reed {calamus) with ink. With such 
inks as are in use among us, quill-pens have been found to an- 
swer this purpose better than the reed. Now, turning to the 
scripture, we find the name volume {megillah, not sepher,) occur- 
ring for the first time in the Book of Psalms, where we read in 
our vulgate — "In capite libri scriptum est de me " — {in the head 
of (he book it is written of me) ; according to the Hebrew it would 



OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 



39 



be, " in volumine libri ' J — (in the volume of the look) ; and thus, 
in Jeremias, Esdras, &c, we find the word megillah, which pro- 
perly designates the volume , repeatedly occurring. But though 
the word megillah does not occur in the more ancient books, yet, 
according to what has been observed already, the volume-form 
of book may have been in use from the earliest times. The name 
sepher does not exclude it ; and, indeed, St. Jerome has often 
rendered this word by volumen. This form of books will explain 
many expressions of the sacred scripture ; thus, for example, in 
the Apocalypse (vi, 14,) it is said, "the heavens receded like a 
book rolled up." In St. Luke (iv, 17, 20,) we see the form of 
the books, in our Redeemer's time, and the manner of using 
them in the synagogue, clearly pointed out: "And the book of 
Isaias the prophet was delivered unto him, and as he unfolded 

the book, he found the place where it was written and when 

he had folded the boolc, he restored it to the minister." The 
Jews still read the scriptures in the synagogues from the roll — ■ 
the megillah. St. Paul, in his second epistle to Timothy (iv, 13,) 
marks the distinction between the parchment volumes, and those 
made of papyrus: "Bring with thee," he says, "the books, but 
especially the parchments" Ordinarily, the writing was only on 
the inner surface, or page, of the volume. A volume written 
over on both sides was unusual. Of such a volume the prophet 
Ezekiel (xi, 9,) and St John in the Apocalypse (v, 1,) speak, 
" written over on the inside and outside." In the prophet Jere- 
mias, we have mention made of ink, where St. Jerome translates 
"ego scribebam volumine atramento " — " I wrote in a volume 
with ink" — Jerem. xxxvi, 18. Some, to be sure, have found 
fault with St. Jerome for understanding the Hebrew word in 
this place to mean ink; but the Chaldee paraphrase, and the 
Syriac version, agree with him, and there is no good reason for 
disputing the sense of the wor^. Prom a learned note on this 
verse of Jeremias, in Kitto's pictorial bible, we extract the fol- 
lowing : ' ' From the particulars collected by Wincklemann and 
others concerning the ink of the ancients, it would seem, that it 
differed very little from that which the Orientals still employ, 
and which is really better adapted than our own thin vitriolic 
inks, to the formation of their written characters ; and this is 
also true of the Hebrew, the letters of which are more easily 
and properly formed with this ink than with our own, and with 
reeds than with quill-pens. The ink is usually composed of 
lampblack or powdered charcoal, prepared with gum and water, 
and sold in small particles, or grains, like gunpowder. The 
writer who wants to replenish his ink-horn, puts some of this 
into it, and adds a little water, but not enough to render the ink 



40 



HISTORICAL NOTICE OF THE EOKil 



much thinner than that of our printers. Those who use much 
of it, work up the ink-grains with water — in nearly the same 
way that artists prepare their colours — and then put it into their 
inkstand." As soon as the custom was introduced of writing on 
such materials as the skins of animals, linen, papyrus, the bark 
of trees, so soon must ink, or some such substance, have been 
used for the formation of the letters. Indeed, whatever Calmet 
may say to the contrary, there is a clear reference to ink of some 
sort in Numbers, (v, 23,) in the passage, where the trial by the 
water of jealousy of the wife suspected of adultery is prescribed: 
and in illustration of the particular verse to which we have refer- 
red, it may be observed, that the ink even now in use in the East 
has in its composition no calx of iron, or other material that can 
make a permanent dye ; so that, although the writing made of it 
has an intense and brilliant black colour, which will remain un- 
changed for ages, the characters may at any time be washed out 
with water. 

Section. — Of the Divisions and marks of Distinction occurring 
in the Scripture. 

First. — In both the New and Old Testaments, there was 
always a natural division into books, or distinct writings ; thus, 
the writings of the different prophets were divided from each 
other, and thus were the different epistles of St. Paul naturally 
divided from each other. It is unnecessary to go through all the 
instances in which this kind of division occurs — but in one of our 
present books there was from the beginning a natural division 
into several distinct parts, that is, the Book of Psalms, which is 
made up of a number of distinct hymns or psalms — the whole 
number is one hundred and fifty, and in this number are agreed 
the Hebrew and Septuagint, and also our vulgate, which, in the 
Book of Psalms, is a translation 'from the Septuagint ; the two 
latter, however, arrive at this number of one hundred and fifty 
by a somewhat different division of the psalms, from that which 
the Hebrews make. In the Hebrew our ninth psalm is divided 
into two, the second of which begins with the words of verse 
twenty-two, which are thus read in the vulgate, " Ut quid 
Domine recess isti longe" and then the Hebrew bibles are one over 
us in number, up to our one hundred and thirteenth, "In exitu 
Israel" This they also divide at the verse " Non ?iobis" which 
verse in the vulgate follows the eighth verse of the one hundred 
and thirteenth psalm, but it is not marked verse nine, but verse 
one, and the next verse is marked two, and so on to the end of 
the psalm. Thus our one hundred and fourteenth is their one 



OF THE SACEED BOOKS. 



41 



hundred and sixteenth ; but then they join our one hundred ard 
fourteenth, " Dilexi" and one hundred and fifteenth, " Credidi 
propter quod; 99 thus they remain one over us up to our one hun- 
dred and forty-sixth, which they join to the one hundred and 
forty-seventh, and so both continue together to the end. Pro- 
testants follow the Hebrew bibles in their division of the psalms. 
We may observe here that according to this natural division of 
the scripture into the various writings of which it is made up, 
the five books of Moses would count only for one, and in all like- 
lihood they at first formed but one book. 

We shall now speak of the manner in which the Jews divided 
the scriptures. St. Jerome informs us in his Prologus Galeatus, 
that the Jews made three great divisions of the scripture, viz., 
into the law, the prophets, and the Hagiographa, or sacred 
writings ; of the law they counted five books, that is, the five 
Books of Moses; of the prophets they reckoned eight, viz., 1, 
Josue ; 2, Judges, with which they include Ruth, because her 
history appertains to the time of the Judges ; 3, Samuel, which 
we call first and second Kings; 4, Kings, which, with us, is 
divided into the third and fourth book of Kings ; 5, Isaias ; 6, 
Jeremias ; 7, Ezekiel ; 8, the twelve minor prophets, of which 
they made but one book. Of the Hagiographa they reckoned 
nine books, viz., 1, Job ; 2, David, or the book of psalms ; 3, the 
book of the proverbs of Solomon ; 4, Ecclesiastes ; 5, the Canticle 
of Canticles ; 6, Daniel, whom, for a silly reason, they excluded 
from the division of the prophets, viz., because he lived at a 
royal court ; 7, Dibre Hajamim, that is, the words of the days, 
which we call first and second Paralipomenon. This is by no 
means the book of the words of the days referred to so often in the 
history of the kings of Israel and Judah ; 8, Esdras, which, with 
us, is divided into first and second Esdras ; 9, Esther ; and thus, 
according to these, there were twenty-two books — the same 
number as the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, It is to be 
observed that this is the division which prevailed among the 
Jews in St. Jerome's time, and which continues to prevail among 
them. It does not appear to have been very ancient, and was 
first introduced by the Hebrew Jews, and hence our deutero- 
canonical books do not appear in their enumeration ; for, as to 
the Hellenist Jews, they adopted that division and enumeration 
and collocation of the books which we find in the Septuagint, 
and which we follow in the Latin vulgate — it is unnecessary to 
repeat here the well-known names of the books, ~We have 
already established our canon, and hence the deuterocanonical 
books are properly numbered with the other inspired books ; 
and it would be easy to show that the arrangement and division 



42 



HISTORICAL NOTICE OF THE FORI! 



of the books, adopted by the Septuagint and Vulgate, is far more 
just and natural than that which the Hebrew Jews have made, 
and which we have explained above. 

As to subdivisions of the books, which were made by the Jews. 
They divided the book of Psalms into five parts. To this division 
St. Jerome alludes in his Prologus Galeatus, where he says that 
the Jews made of the Psalms one volume, quinque iricisionibus. 
The Jews, moreover, divided the Law into portions, Parashioth, 
according to the number of Sabbaths in the year : one of these 
portions was ordered to be read in the synagogue each sabbath, 
and thus the entire Pentateuch would be read in the year. These 
Parashioth were subdivided into smaller sections, termed Siderim, 
or orders. Many suppose that this division into Parashioth was 
made by Esdras. Afterwards, when in the persecution of Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes, the reading of the law was not permitted, the 
Jews took from the prophets for the year's reading an equal 
number of sections with that into which the Pentateuch was 
divided — these sections of the prophets were termed HaphtorotJi. 
Again, when the reading of the law was restored by the Alacha- 
bees, these sections of the prophets continued also to be read, the 
first lesson on each sabbath being from the law, the second from 
the prophets. Haphtarah signifies dismission, because when the 
section of the prophets was read, the people were dismissed. 
It is to be observed, that the Haphtoroth did not comprehend 
the whole of the prophets, as the Parashioth did the whole Pen- 
tateuch. Other more minute subdivisions of the books have been 
made by the Jews, but as these, in all probability, were intro- 
duced long after the establishment of the Christian church, 
it will be more convenient to refer to them in another place. 

To come now to the divisions made in the scripture within the 
Christian period — our present division of the bible into chapters 
was not introduced for a long time after the commencement of 
the Christian era — our present division into verses is a still more 
modern introduction. There was a very ancient division of the 
scripture into Titloi and Kephalaia. The Titloi. titles, called in 
Latin Brer-s, were larger divisions. The Kephalaia, heads or 
chapters, called in Latin Capital a, were subdivisions of the Titloi, 
or Breves. The summary of the contents of the Breves was 
called Erevarium, and the list of the Capital a was Capitidatio. 
The Greek names of these divisions are the more ancient, because 
in the beginning of the church the common edition of the scrip- 
tures was in Greek. These titles and chapters were marked at 
the head of the book, and each of them had a letter, or cypher, 
prefixed to it. These same letters and figures were marked in 
the margin of the text, to indicate the commencement of the 



OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 



43 



several sections mentioned at the head of the hook. For the 
same purpose of marking the commencement of the section, 
there was a little blank space left hy the copyist between these 
several divisions of the hooks. With the exception then of a 
point, and this little blank space to mark the division between 
the sections, that is, the titles and chapters (capitula), and the 
break that naturally occurred between the different books, there 
was no other division whatever, of the parts, in the old manu- 
scripts. Such were the ancient Christian Bibles ; for this mode 
of division appears to have been applied both to the Old and 
the New Testament : but at what precise period of the Christian 
Church such sections were first introduced is a matter of dispute. 
Formerly, there was a great variation between different authors, 
in giving the number of these divisions. The most approved 
division of Titloi or Breves, for the four Gospels, is that given by 
Tatian in his Gospel Harmony (Anno 172). Ammonius, a 
learned Christian of Alexandria, of the third century, in a similar 
work, has given the most approved division of the Gospels into 
KepJialaia or Capitula, called from him the Ammonian sections. 
Eusebius, the well-known ecclesiastical historian, adapted the 
Ammonian sections to his canons. These Eusebian canons are 
frequently prefixed to editions of the Greek Testament : they 
are ten in number. In the first canon or table is arranged, in 
order of the sections (Capitula), the Redeemer's history, as given 
by all the four Evangelists — that is, the parts of the history that 
are common to all the four. In the second canon the portions of 
the history which Matthew, Mark, and Luke concur in giving. 
In the third the portions found common to Matthew, Luke, and 
John. In the fourth, Matthew, Mark, and John. Fifth, 
Matthew and Luke. Sixth, Matthew and Mark. Seventh, 
Matthew and John. Eighth, Matthew and Mark. Ninth, Luke 
and John. Tenth, the portions given by only one of the four 
Evangelists. This is called a harmony : it may be rather looked 
upon as simply an index to the Gospels. The division into 
Keplialaia, or chapters, of the Acts and Catholic Epistles is 
ascribed to Euthalius, Bishop of Sulca, in Egypt, in the fifth 
century. He (Euthalius) published St. Paul's Epistles, with the 
division of them into Capitula, that had been made by some 
unknown person in the fourth century. There was another 
division of the New Testament in the early times, besides the 
titles and little chapters, which ought not to be passed over 
without mention, viz., the division into lessons, Avayvoo<f>j,ara. 
This division of the New Testament into lessons (Richard Simon 
observes, in his critical history of the New Testament, last 
chapter) is very ancient; and although they do not differ much 



44 



HISTORICAL XOIICE OF THE FOE^I 



from the titles, yet, he observes, we ought not to confound the 
two together as some authors have clone. Some ancient copies 
of the Greek !Xew Testament are found with the words 
and Ts/x~ inserted, to point out where one lesson ends and 
another begins. Euthalius, above mentioned, is said to have 
divided St. Paul's Epistles into Ava^vatf/xara ; and Andrew, 
bishop of Caesarea, in Cappadocia, divided the Apocalypse, at the 
beginning of the sixth century, into twenty-four lessons, which 
he termed Koyoi. In some manuscripts, the beginning and 
ending of the AvayvaafLara [lessons) is marked by merely the 
initial letters, alpha and tau (tsaos). In examining 

ancient manuscripts we find some divided into verses also ; but 
these are very different from the verses which we now have ; 
these ancient verses were called orr/jji or linece, lines. They 
were lines containing as many words as ought to be read unin- 
terruptedly ; hence they were regulated by the sense, and were 
manifestly of great use to the reader in the Church, before the 
introduction of points or stops. Euthalius (mentioned before for 
his useful labours in the division of the scripture), when he was 
a deacon of Alexandria, published an edition of the four gospels, 
and afterwards (when he was bishop of Sulca) an edition of the 
Acts of the Apostles, and of all the apostolical epistles, in all 
which he made this division into orr/ji — Wetstein, Proleg., p. 
73. The Codex Beza, Codex Claramontanus, and Codex Sanger- 
manensis, are written in these cny^ot or lines. 

INow, as to our present division of the bible into chapters, 
some have ascribed it to Lanfranc, who was archbishop of Can- 
terbury in the eleventh century ; others would attribute it to 
Cardinal Stephen Langton, who was archbishop of the same see 
about the beginning of the thirteenth century ; but the real au- 
thor of it was Cardinal Hugo de Sancto Caro, who flourished 
about the middle of the thirteenth century. It is to him that we 
are also indebted for that most useful work, the Concordance of the 
Scripture. "When Cardinal Hugo made his division into chap- 
ters, he subdivided these into smaller portions, which he marked 
with the letters A. B. C, &c, placed in the margin, and this 
subdivision of the cardinal's, marked by the letters in the margin, 
may be still seen in the early printed editions of the bible. The 
division into chapters, of which we are speaking, has been uni- 
versally adopted by Jews and Christians. 

As to our present division into verses. First, for the proto- 
canonical books of the Old Testament, we have taken this 
division from the Jews. They would endeavour to persuade us 
that it commenced with Closes and was continued on according 
as the different books were written — some of them refer it to 



OF THE SACKED BOOKS. 



45 



Esdras : but it is most probable that this division was made by 
the Masorets, of whom we shall speak just now, and that it was 
not introduced before the end of the fourth century. Rabbi Mor- 
decai Nathan, a Jewish teacher of the fifteenth century, was the 
person who introduced the chapters of Cardinal Hugo in the He- 
brew bible, but instead of the marginal letters, he marked the first 
and then every fifth verse with a numeral letter, S. H. \, &c, 1, 
5, 10, &c. The verses in the Hebrew bible were first regularly 
marked with the figures in common use, by Athias, a Jew of 
Amsterdam, in the year 1661. He retained the numeral letters 
of Nathan at every fifth verse, as Hebrew bibles always have 
them at present. Long before the time of Athias, however, viz., 
in 1/548, Robert Stephens, the famous printer of Paris, had 
marked with the numbers the verses of the Old Testament, in 
his edition of the Latin vulgate. This same Eobert Stephens is 
the inventor of the verses in the New Testament. They appeared 
first in his edition of the j^ew Testament given in the year 1551. 
His son, Henry informs us that he made this division during a 
journey from Lyons to Paris — inter equitan&um — from which 
words some infer that he made the division whilst actually 
travelling ; others would rather understand them to mean that, 
when fatigued with riding, he entertained himself at the inn with 
this work. We are not to suppose, however, that Robert 
Stephens was either the first inventor of verses in the New 
Testament, or that he was the first who marked the verses in the 
Old Testament with the Arabic numerals. James le Eevre 
(Stapulensis) had marked the verses in the Psalms with figures 
as early as 1509 ; and the learned Dominican, Sanctes Pagninus 
marked the verses in this way in the Old and New Testament, 
in the year 1528. It is, however, only in the Protocanonical 
Books of the Old Testament that Stephens follows Pagninus. 
In marking the verses in the deuterocanonical books of the Old 
Testament, it is highly probable that Stephens availed himself 
of the labours of Vatablus. In these deuterocanonical books we 
still follow Stephens' editions of the Latin vulgate, in the enu- 
meration and division of the verses. 

Our present punctuation of the bible does not date from the 
very early times. In. reality the bible was at first written with- 
out any such distinction. The Scripture, says Richard Simon, 
has this in common with all the Greek and Latin books, which 
w r ere also written without any distinction, before points and 
commas were invented by grammarians. The first appearance 
of punctuation is the dot and the blank space, marking the divi- 
sion between the sections — these are found in very ancient 
manuscripts, as we have already explained. St. Jerome was 



46 



HISTORICAL NOTICE OP THE JFOKM, ETC. 



the author of a certain system of punctuation, which is praised 
by Cassiodorus. As to our present points, however, the comma 
was invented in the eighth century, the semicolon in the ninth. 
The other points and stops were a still later invention. The 
Greek spirits and accents were not earlier, in the opinion of 
most writers, than the seventh century.'' 4 If the very ancient 
Greeks were particular in using the H to mark the spiritus 
asper, it fell into disuse as early even as the first century. Iota 
subscript in Greek manuscripts was introduced in the tenth cen- 
tury, but it was often written by the side of other letters, even 
after that time. The Greek grammarians, it is said, used points 
or stops, even as early as the time of the apostles, but it is cer- 
tain that these did not make their way into common use, but 
were confined to the schools of the grammarians. Points, how- 
ever, were sometimes used before the present system of punctua- 
tion was introduced. — ^larsh on Michaelis, p. 892, vol. ii, refers 
to them as seen by himself in the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex 
Bezos . In the Hebrew bibles there is a most elaborate system 
of punctuation or interpunction of the verses, introduced by the 
ilasorets. These were Jewish doctors, who flourished about the 
end of the fifth century — they have their name from the word 
Masora, which signifies tradition — this was the name which they 
gave to the body of rules which they drew up for the correct 
reading of the Hebrew text, because they pretended it came 
down bv tradition from the earliest times. The interpunction of 
the verses these doctors made by means of the accents ; but the 
Masora comprehends various most minute details regarding the text 

thus they not only divided the verses by means of the accents 

— they also calculated the number of verses — they marked the 
peculiarities in the letters — if a letter were shorter than usual, or 
written crooked. Thus the number of verses in Genesis is one 
thousand rive hundred and thirty-four — the middle verse of it is the 
fortieth of the twenty- seventh chapter — the whole bible contains 
twenty-three thousand two hundred and six verses : there are 
two verses in the Pentateuch, all the words of which end in 
mem. Aleph occurs in the bible forty-two thousand three hun- 
dred aucl seventy-seven times. Beth thirty-eight thousand two 
hundred and eighteen, and so on. This series of observations on 
the text was abridged to bring it within the margin of the He- 
brew bibles. This first abridgment was called the little Masora. 
It was found to be too short, and then a more copious abridg- 
ment was substituted for it, which was called the great Masora. 
The omitted parts were added at the end of the text, and called 



* See Butler's Horas Biblical. 



PRESENT STATE OF THE ORIGINAL TEXTS, ETC. 47 

the final Masora* To these Masoretic doctors we are also to 
ascribe the invention of the vowel points, and their addition to 
the Hebrew text : but of this we shall treat more fully in 
another place. 



DISSERTATION III. 



OX THE PRESENT STATE OF THE ORIGINAL TEXTS OF 
THE SACRED SCRIPTURE. 

As we intend here to treat briefly a question which has been 
olten discussed by both Catholic and Protestant writers, we 
shall confine our inquiry to those books which are admitted 
by Protestants in common with us, that is — to the books 
found at present in our Hebrew bibles and Greek testaments. 
As to the other books of the Old Testament not found in the 
present Hebrew bibles, we propose to discuss in the introduction 
to each particular book the question regarding the language of 
its original text ; and also whether the original text be still pre- 
served or not. ¥e would wish it to be understood also that we 
do not look upon the Greek testament as containing the 
original of all the books of the New Testament, persuaded as 
we are that the Gospel of St. Matthew, at least, w r as written 
originally in Syro-chaldaic. 

We come now to discuss the integrity of these texts found in 
the Hebrew bibles at present, and in the Greek testaments ; and 
first for the Hebrew bible. We find that two extreme opinions 
have had their defenders. The first, that the Hebrew bibles 
have been wilfully corrupted by the Jews. Although Walton 
in Proleg. does not cite any Protestant authority as favouring 
this opinion, yet Vossius de Septuagenta- interpreti. held it, and 
L. Cappel in the Critica Sacra. The second opinion is, that no 
mistakes whatever, even of copyists, have crept into the text. 
JNow, as to the first opinion, we assert against the defenders of 
it, that the Hebrew bibles have not been wilfully corrupted, 
and, moreover, that no substantial interpolation has found its 
way into them ; for were such interpolation to be admitted, then 
it must have been made either before the coming of Christ or 
since His coming. JS"ow in neither one period nor the other 
could it have been made. 1ST ot before His coming, for before 



48 



PBESEXT STATE OF THE 



that time we cannot suppose that the Jews would wish to 
corrupt the scriptures, and our adversaries here, whom we sup- 
pose to be Christians, will admit this; for the reason why 
they contend that the scriptures have been wilfully corrupted, 
is that desire which they ascribe to the Jews of getting over the 
arguments taken from the sacred text in favour of the Christian 
religion. !S~ow this reason manifestly can only apply to the 
time after Christ's coming, and it would show a great ignorance 
of the regard which the Jews had for their scriptures, to suppose 
that they would have wilfully corrupted them without any 
motive (see Josephus Contra Appion, lib. 1, sec. 8) ; and even if 
we suppose that private motives could have ever prevailed with 
individuals to attempt this interpolation, so much opposed to 
the feelings of the people generally, it would have been impos- 
sible for such an attempt to succeed, considering how well 
known the scriptures were among the Jewish people. Again, 
we see that our Divine Redeemer, whilst he upbraids the Scribes 
and Pharisees with their many sins, does not count this among 
them that they had either wilfully corrupted, or by their negli- 
gence had permitted the interpolation of the sacred text. On 
the contrary, He refers them to this text as establishing his 
mission, ' ' Search the scriptures" &c, or, " Ye search the scrip- 
tures" which he would not have done if it had been a corrupt 
text. So much will suffice for the first part of our argument, 
that is — regarding the time before Christ's coming, particularly 
as this part is discussed at length in our Treatises of Eeligion. 

This interpolation could not have been made since Christ's 
coming ; for if it could have been made, it would have been 
either before the time that St. Jerome made his translation or 
since. Now, neither at one time nor the other can this inter- 
polation have been made. First, not before the time of St. 
Jerome's translation, for St. Jerome, who knew the disposition 
of the Jews in regard to the scriptures so well, did not think so, 
that is — that this text had been wilfully corrupted ; neither did 
the church think so, which approved of his translation. Besides, 
at the period of which we speak, even if the Jews had been so 
disposed, they could not have introduced corruptions into the 
text without their conduct becoming known, and being repro- 
bated in the church. Now, we are not aware that there has 
been ever any reclamation on the part of the church in reference 
to this matter. The church, I say, would have known the evil 
attempts of the Jews, for there never were wanting in the Chris- 
tian church those who were acquainted with the Hebrew scrip- 
tures ; even before the time of Origen there were from time to 
time Jewish converts attached to these Hebrew scriptures and 



ORIGINAL TEXTS OF THE SACKED SCRIPTURE. 



49 



well acquainted with them ; and rig-en' s famous edition of this 
text in his Hexapla, where he gave it both in Hebrew and Greek 
characters, attracted more attention to it. Again, if the Jews 
had wilfully corrupted the text, influenced, as our opponents in 
this place say, by their hatred of the Christian religion, then 
they surely would not have spared those prophecies which make 
so manifestly against themselves — such as those which fix the 
time of the Redeemer's coming ; yet they have left all these, 
whilst almost every change of the text which is ascribed to them, 
even if it was wilful, would not induce any important change in 
the sense of the passage in which it is found. We have said 
enough to show that the Jews have not corrupted the text before 
the time of St. Jerome. Now, for the time since St. Jerome's 
translation was made, it is beyond all question that this wilful 
corruption of the text cannot be proved against the Jews; for. 
throughout this period we find an admirable agreement between 
St. Jerome's version and this text, generally speaking, in every 
passage. "We conclude, then, that the Jews have not at any 
time wilfully corrupted this text ; and, moreover, that their 
manifest veneration for it, at all times, would not have permitted 
them to overlook the introduction of any substantial inter- 
polation into it. 

We admit, however, that although the Jews have not 
wilfully corrupted the text, yet that upon an occasion where 
there were two readings, they may have rather followed that 
one which was less favourable to the Christians, whom they 
hated. In this way we explain the non-appearance in the 
present Hebrew text of the word VifcO, " they have dug " (Psalm 
22, in the Hebrew bibles, verse 17) ; in place of which we now 
have 'HfcO u as a lion" This change in the text has been made 
since the time of the Masorets, and consequently since the time 
of St. Jerome ; for the Masora in the book of Numbers states, 
that in this passage of the psalm the Iceri, that is, the word that 
should be read, and which was then written in the margin of the 
psalm, was *HfcO, but that the hetib, or word written in the text, 
was VlfcO. Now, we find that the Jews have put the keri in the 
text, and omitted the hetib altogether, although by interpreting 
the word as they do, as a lion, they give an absurd and incon- 
gruous sense to the passage. There are cases, also, in which the 
vowel points now added to the Hebrew text would give a read- 
ing different from that which St. Jerome followed ; but this does 
not prove that there has been any corruption of the text, because 
the vowel points have been added to the text after the time of 
St. Jerome, and make no part of it : this we shall prove when 
treating of the Hebrew manuscripts. We do not, however, 

E 



50 



PRESENT STATE OF THE 



intend to speak disparagingly of the Masoretie reading— that is, 
the reading of the text, -which is fixed by the present vowel- 
point system, and which, generally speaking, agrees so well 
with our Tulgate. Indeed we have seen just now that that alter- 
ation of the text of the psalm (22nd in the Hebrew bible}, 
wnicii is almost the only one that introduces an important- 
change in the sense, was not made by the Masorets. 

Having now vindicated the Hebrew text from any wilful 
corruption or substantial interpolation, we have to reply to the 
objection brought against this doctrine, taken from some of the 
fathers, who appear to charge the Jews with a wilful corruption 
of the scripture. Our answer to this is, that these fathers do 
not treat of the changes made by the Jews in the Hebrew text, 
but of the corrupt representations of that text in several passages 
of the Greek versions that passed current among the Jews — that 
is, the versions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus ; and in 
reality they found passages in these which deserved censure. 
Thus, for example, in the version of Aquila, the famous prophecy 
of Isaias (chap, vii, v. 14) has not the true sense assigned to it 
which the Septuagint gives. 

Xow, on the other hand, it cannot be said that the Hebrew 
text is free from slight error s. The early so-called Eeformers of the 
sixteenth century were very anxious to uphold the perfect puritv 
of the Hebrew and Greek texts, because since, according to them, 
God had given the scriptures to be the sole rule of faith, so they 
wished to make it appear that he had preserved them in their 
primitive purity as they came from the hands of the sacred 
writers. tVhat is here stated regarding the early Reformers 
may be learned from TTalton himself, in his Prolegomena to the 
Polyglot, in his dissertation on the subject which we are here 
treating ; and to show that this assertion of the complete puritv 
of the Hebrew text has not been without support from Catholics 
also, he ("Walton) there refers to Pagninus as defendiug it. But 
most obvious and evident reasons have long since left this asser- 
tion without defenders ; for such an absolute integrity of the text 
as is here in question, would suppose that God, by a continual 
miracle, had preserved the sacred text from the slightest mis- 
takes of copyists. Nothing less than a continual miracle could 
have done so, as we may see by the mistakes that inevitably 
creep in as a consequence of frequent copying in any other book. 
2sow, there is no sufficient reason for thinking that God would 
have derogated from his ordinary laws for the purpose of pre- 
serving the copyists of the sacred text from these slight mistakes. 
But, on the other hand, it appears manifest that no such miracle 
has taken place ; for if such had occurred, then all Hebrew 



ORIGINAL TEXTS OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURE. 



51 



manuscripts should agree, even in matters of the least impor- 
tance ; whereas this is far from being the case, either with the 
modern or the ancient manuscripts. The modern manuscripts, 
which have been made according to the Masora, although they 
agree better among themselves, because corrected on the same 
principles, do not, however, agree perfectly, since the eastern 
and western Jews do not read certain places in the bible after the 
same manner. The different readings of Ben Asher and Ben 
Naphtali, which are printed in all the Jewish bibles, are a new 
proof that there is not a perfect agreement among all the manu- 
scripts. In tine, the infinite number of various readings collected 
by Kennicott and De Bossi, leave not the slightest doubt upon 
this point. 

The ancient manuscripts are not more in accord with each 
other than the modern : for, in the first place, the authors of 
the Masora admit that when they undertook their work the 
manuscripts presented many variations. Again, the Septuagint 
version has been made upon ancient manuscripts, so have the 
versions of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and others. Now, 
these neither agree among themselves nor with the text which 
we have to-day. From all that we have said it manifestly 
follows that the Hebrew Bibles, although free from wilful cor- 
ruption or substantial interpolation, are by no means exempt 
from the errors and mistakes of copyists. 

jSTow, as to the Greek text in the New Testament, that it is not 
perfectly faultless is too clear to require any proof. The immense 
multiplication of the copies of the New Testament has been 
attended with numerous discrepancies between these copies, pro- 
ceeding from the mistakes of copyists, either mistaking one word 
for another, or inadvertently passing over words, or mistaking for 
a part of the text, and, therefore, inserting quotations from other 
parts of the Scripture marked in the margin, or, in fine, con- 
founding with the text words introduced to mark the commence- 
ment or termination of those portions of Scripture which were 
read publicly in the Church at the time of divine worship. Yet 
those numerous discrepancies,' for the most part, do not greatly 
affect the sense, and when they do we are not left without 
sufficient means of correcting those copies in which a fault of any 
importance is found. These means are either the collation of 
manuscripts, or the testimony of the Scripture in another place, 
or the examination of ancient versions, which have been made 
upon more accurate copies of the text than any which we now 
have. But of this point we shall treat more fully in our Disser- 
tation on the Elements of Biblical Criticism. We shall conclude 
our observations for the present by remarking how unreasonable 



52 



PRESENT STATE, ETC. 



it would be, after what we have said, to insist that everything, 
which is found in a version differing from the present Hebrew 
or Greek text ought to be changed, and rendered conformable to 
the present Hebrew or Greek. This was the cry of Calvin and 
his associates in the Reformation, by which they implied that 
these fountains (viz., the Hebrew and Greek) had continued to 
our time in all their primitive purity. That they have not con- 
tinued in that perfect purity will not, at the present day, be 
controverted by any one who has the least pretensions to be 
considered a Biblical scholar. 



DISSEKTATION IV. 

ON THE HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS OE THE BIBLE. 

Our observations upon this subject shall be but few. Hebrew 
manuscripts when collated do not present so many discrepancies 
as the Greek manuscripts, because they are not so numerous, nor 
have we any very ancient Hebrew manuscripts. There is no 
Hebrew manuscript at present known older than the eleventh 
century ; and again, all those that we know being of an age 
subsequent to the formation of the rules of the Masora have, for 
the most part, been corrected according to these rules. However 
there are still many discrepancies between Hebrew manuscripts ; 
and, in the first place, as Richard Simon well observes, in his 
Critical History of the Old Testament, we must cautiously dis- 
tinguish between the synagogue manuscripts and those which 
have been made for the use of private persons. The synagogue 
manuscripts or rolls have been always made with greater care 
than the others — (the Jews always use only manuscripts for the 
reading of the Scriptures in their synagogues). The Talmud 
contains most particular rules in regard to these manuscripts, 
prescribing the utmost accuracy to the transcriber, and various 
superstitious niceties, which, it is said, the Jews always most 
particularly follow. In the first place, these rolls contain only 
the portions of Scripture appointed to be read in the synagogue, 
viz. — first, the Pentateuch ; second, the sections of the Prophets 
appointed to be read ; and third, the Book of Esther, as it is in 
the Hebrew Bible, which last is only read at the feast of Purim 
or lots. These three portions of Scripture are never put toge- 
ther, but written on separate rolls. They are written in the 
Chaldee or square Hebrew character, without vowels and accents. 



1 



HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 53 

The parchment is prepared by Jews only, and must be made 
from the skins of clean animals ; then they are divided into 
columns, the breadth of which must never exceed half their 
length. The number of the columns is fixed, as also of 
the lines in the column, and of the words in each line. 
Then the ink is to be prepared, and the copyist must 
purify himself before transcribing the incommunicable name of 
Jehova. When the manuscript is finished its revision must take 
place within thirty days after, and although it will not be set 
aside on account of a few mistakes in the copying, yet if they 
exceed a certain fixed number, which is yet very small, the 
whole manuscript will be condemned as unfit for the synagogue. 
These manuscripts for the synagogue are taken from the best 
exemplars ; and certainly, as far as they are known to Christians, 
exhibit a great uniformity in their text ; but then, as Richard 
Simon well observes, these minute rules by which so much, 
uniformity is now secured in the transcription of the synagogue 
rolls, are, comparatively speaking, of modern date, and, there- 
fore, do not prove that formerly many mistakes of copyists may 
not have crept even into the manuscripts of the synagogue. 

Manuscripts which have been made for the use of private 
individuals are held in much less esteem than those of which we 
have been speaking. They are written, some in the Chaldee 
square character, and some in the rabbinical. Their form is 
left to the will of the transcriber, or of him for whose use they 
are made ; hence they are found in folio, quarto, &c. They are 
found either written on parchment or on cotton paper, or on the 
common kind of paper. The vowel points are not excluded from 
these, but they are generally written with ink of a different 
colour from that used for the consonants ; the consonants are 
written with black ink. Initial words and letters are frequently 
decorated with gold and silver colours. But few of these manu- 
scripts (Simon observes, Hist or ie Critique du Vieux Testament, lib. 
1, eh. 21) are exact; it being difficult to find copyists well qualified 
for the task. However, it will sometimes happen that these 
manuscripts will scarcely yield in exactness of execution to the 
synagogue rolls, when they have been made for the use of 
wealthy persons, who being anxious to procure the best copies, 
were, at the same time, able by their wealth to secure the labour 
of the best copyists. 

Richard Simon (loco citato), and many other critics with him, 
form a much higher estimate of the manuscript of the Spanish 
Jews than they do of those of the French and Italian Jews, or of 
the German Jews, which last class of manuscripts they consider 
the most inaccurate of all. These three classes of manuscripts 



54 HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS 

are distinguished by three different kinds of character. The 
Spanish character is square and majestic. The Erench and 
Italian character is somewhat more round and less majestic. 
The German is sharp-cornered and leaning. Simon adds that 
these good manuscripts made by the Spanish Jews can now be 
found only at Constantinople, Salonica, and some otner places of 
the Levant, where the Spanish Jews took refuge when they 
were driven from Spain (Hist. Grit, ut Supra). The Jews 
acknowledge two principal recensions or editions of the Hebrew 
bible, proceeding from their two celebrated academies of Tiberias 
and Babylon. These schools flourished in the period from the 
fifth to the eleventh century. The discrepancies between these 
two editions have been noted, after a diligent collation of the 
manuscripts of the western (Tiberias) and eastern (Babylon) 
Jews, made by Aaron Ben Asher, president of the academy of 
Tiberias, and Jacob Ben Naphtali, president of the academy of 
Babylon. This collation was made about the beginning of the 
eleventh century. The discrepancies almost all relate to the vowel 
points, and, consequently, are not of great importance. The 
western Jews, and our printed editions of the Hebrew scriptures, 
almost wholly follow the recension of Aaron Ben Asher. In the 
BiUiotheca Sacra of Le Long may be found an interesting cata- 
logue of the' most famous Hebrew manuscripts (Edition by 
Boerner, torn. 1st, p. 64). The same writer also furnishes us 
with a full catalogue of the printed editions of the Hebrew 
scriptures, brought down to the beginning of the eighteenth 
century. This catalogue is continued by Masch down to an 
advanced period of the eighteenth century. But we must 
reserve for another time the observations which we have to make 
on the printed editions of the Hebrew bible. The present place 
will not, however, be inappropriate for discussing the antiquity of 
the Hebrew vowel points, by way of Appendix to this dissertation. 

Section.— On the Antiquity of the Hebrew Vowel Points. 

Were we to believe what some of the Jews tell us on this sub- 
ject, we should look upon the points as coeval with the text 
itself ; however, even the Jews are, for the most part, satisfied 
with ascribing their addition to the text to Esdras and the great 
Council that was held in his time (Simon, Kistorie Critique du 
Vieux Testament). Elias Levita, a German Jew, was the first 
in modern times to dispute their antiquity. He wrote about 
Luther's time, He would not admit that they were introduced 
by Esdras^ but ascribed their invention to the Masoretic doctors 



OF THE BIBLE. 



55 



of the school of Tiberias. Buxtorf, the father, endeavoured to 
refute his arguments. But Ludovicus Capellus, a Protestant 
divine of France, and Professor of Hebrew in the Protestant 
University of Saumur, replied to all that Buxtorf advanced, in 
a work entitled Arcanum Punotationis Revelatum. Buxtorf, the 
son, in vindication of his father's opinion, wrote an answer to 
Capellus. This answer was not considered satisfactory, and 
hence the generality of the learned have adhered to the opinion 
of Capellus. (Prideaux. Connection of the History of the Old 
and New Testament. AT i Caul's edition. London: 1845. Vol. I. 
p. 332, and following.) The Catholic doctors, in particular, 
have never been favourable to the pretended antiquity of these 
points. Following these, we assert that the introduction of 
these points cannot be ascribed to a period earlier than the sixth 
century of the Christian Church. They were invented by the 
Jewish rabbins of the school of Tiberias, and added to the text, 
in order that the genuine reading of the scripture received from 
tradition might be ever after preserved. These rabbins wert 
called 3Iasorets, from having composed the Masora, as we have 
observed in another place. This work, called by the name of 
JIasora, which name signifies teadition, is defined to be " the 
critical doctrine regarding the right reading and writing of the 
Hebrew text of the sacred scripture" It is to be observed that 
no one says that the Hebrew text was ever pronounced without 
vowels, since without these the consonants could not be pro- 
nounced ; but the opinion which we defend is. that none of these 
vowel points were added to the text before the time of the 
Masorets, and consequently, neither by Moses nor Esdras. This 
opinion is established by the following arguments : — First, the 
inscriptions on the Jewish sides in the old Hebrew [Samaritan] 
letters want the points. Xow we have no Hebrew coins older 
than the time of the ^lachabees, which was, as is well known, 
posterior to the time of Esdras. Again, the Samaritans have no 
points in their Pentateuch, which is still written in the old 
Hebrew letters — a proof that the points were not in use when 
they received this book. Let us take the earliest date to which 
their getting possession of this book will be ascribed, i.e., when 
the Hebrew priest was sent amongst them. (See 4th Kings, 
xvii, 27, 28.) It follows, at least, that these points were not 
invented or used by Closes, otherwise this book would not have 
been without them. Secondly, the sacred volumes or rolls, 
which the Jews use in their synagogues, are written without 
these points, nor is it lawful for the Jews to use the points in 
these synagogue manuscripts — a thing that certainly would be 
lawful, if not prescribed, supposing them to have been invented 



56 



HEBREW IfAXrSCRTPIS 



by either Hoses or Esdras. Thirdly, in the whole Talmud there 
is no mention made of the vowel points, whereas in very many 
places there was occasion to mention them if they existed at the 
time. "When, tor example, there is an inquiry into the meaning 
of a word which would admit of different meanings, according to 
the different points with which it would he joined, the Tal- 
mudists never say, read, the word, with such a vowel, not with such 
another. 

Xow the Talmud was not completed until about the beginning 
of the sixth century. The Talmud is a body of doctrine (as its 
name indicates) on the whole sacred and civil law of the Jews. 
It is twofold : the Talmud of Jerusalem, finished about the year 
230 of the Christian era, or perhaps later; and the Babylonian 
Talmud, which belongs to a later date. Fourthly, St. Jerome, 
who flourished in the fourth century, and was perfectly skilled 
in the Hebrew language, testifies that the Hebrews even then 
were accustomed to write without the addition of vowels, and 
that, in consequence, there arose sometimes an ambiguity on the 
exposition of the scripture. Tor thus he writes, in his commen- 
tary on Jeremias, ix, 22, " Yerbum Hebraicum quod tribus 
Uteris scribitur (vocales enim in medio hoc verbum apud Hebraeos 
non habet sed pro consequentia et legentis arbitrio,) si legatur, 
~E21 } dabar, sermonem signiflcat, si deler, mortem; si daber, 
loquere. Unde et 70, et Theodotion junxerunt illud praeterito 
capitulo ut dicerent : Disperdent parvulos de /oris, juvenes de 
plateis, morte : Aquila vero et Symmachus transtulerunt XaXijmi 
id est loquere." And again, the same father, on the reading 
vacar and zecer writes thus (Commentary on Isaias, xxvi, 14) — 
" Nec nos terrere debet quod 70 mascidum et caetera interpretes 
memoriam transtulerint, cum iisdem tribus Uteris Z, C, R, utruni- 
que scribatur apud Hebreeos, sed quando memorials dicimus, 
legitur zecer, quando masculum, zacaf" The meaning of all 
which is, that as the Hebrew writes these words without vowels, 
viz., "^7 and and as the words will bear different senses, 
according to the different vowels that are supplied, therefore 
have they been translated differently by the Septuagint, and 
other translators. Many other arguments are adduced in favour 
of this opinion, which we here omit, having produced enough to 
establish our conclusion. Let us now examine the objections 
with which the adversaries of this opinion impugn it. The first 
objection is, that no language can exist without vowels, therefore 
neither can the Hebrew be supposed to have existed without 
them. Answer — So language can be pronounced without vowels, 
but the same necessity does not exist for the use of vowels in 
order to write the words of a language (See Yeith's Scriptura 



OF THE BIBLE. 



57 



contra incredulos Propugnata, de libro primo Esdroc-quaestio 
quarta), where he exemplifies this by a reference to the Samari- 
tan language, ancient Arabic, &c. (Simon, in his Critical History 
of the Old Testament, book i, chapter 27, has some very appro- 
priate observations on this same point). Conformably to the 
excellent observations of Veith, in the work just mentioned, we 
say that the ancient Hebrews made certain letters of the alphabet 
perform the functions of vowels in the writing and reading of 
their books. These letters were four, Aleph, He, Vau, and Tod. 
However, the use of them was attended with many difficulties ; 
and for the right understanding of the text they required the 
assistance of that great key of which we shall afterwards speak. 
The difficulty in the use of them proceeded chiefly from three causes. 
First, because these same letters sometimes performed the func- 
tions of consonants, which was their proper function, sometimes 
that of vowels; nor could it be easily discerned when they per- 
formed one function and when the other, that is, without the help 
of that key to which we have just referred. Secondly, the same 
letters could hold the place of different vowels ; for Aleph was 
often pronounced e, oftener a, sometimes even i and o ; He was 
more frequently expressed by e, but often also by a ; Vau in the 
beginning of a word was always pronounced u, but in the middle 
and end sometimes u and sometimes o ; Yod could have the sound 
of i or e. Thirdly, oftentimes none of these vowels are written 
in the word, but they were left to be understood. We see now 
why the Masorets invented the vowel points, which are fourteen 
in number. After the invention of these the four letters above 
mentioned ceased to perform the function of vowels, and began 
to be termed quiescent letters, because in consequence of this 
invention they are not now always pronounced, even when 
written, but are often quiescent ; their duty being performed by 
the vowel point which is joined to them : indeed Aleph has at 
present no sound but that of the vowel point which is under or 
after it. 

The second objection is, that without the vowel points the 
sense of the Hebrew text would be vague, doubtful, and uncer- 
tain, low, the adversaries say, that it cannot be supposed 
that Grod would leave the Hebrew text in this way down to the 
fifth or sixth century of the Christian Church. To this we 
answer with Veith, that the meaning of the text was by no 
means vague, doubtful, or uncertain; the ambiguity being 
prevented by the continual tradition, use, and judgment of the 
Hebrew Church ; and in the early Christian Church the correct 
reading of the Hebrew text was known principally by means of 
the version of the Seventy. Tradition, then, was the great 



58 



HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS 



means by which the correct reading of the Hebrew text was 
known before the invention of points, and this was the great 
key (to the understanding of the scripture at that time) to which 
we have already more than once referred. From this providence 
in reference to the scripture, Morinus infers well the counsel of 
God, that all should submit themselves to the judgment of the 
church, as did the Israelites formerly, who knew that to be the 
genuine reading of the text which was handed down from the 
doctors of the law to their successors. I>or can it be urged that 
we assign an improbable mode of explaining how the true method 
of reading could be preserved for so long a period without the 
vowel points ; tor it is not dithcult to be conceived how the 
aforesaid tradition regarding the correct method of reading the 
Hebrew text without points could be preserved in its integrity 
tor so many ages ; for there were in every age many doctors 
among the Jews, who were continually occupied with the read- 
ing of the sacred scripture, and who taught the disciples formed 
by them the true method of reading according to the tradition of 
the fathers. Add to this, that at least from the time of the cap- 
tivity, the whole Jewish people were accustomed to hear portions 
of Moses and the prophets read in the Hebrew, every Sabbath, 
in the synagogues. It is not wonderful, therefore, that the 
right method of reading and pronouncing the Hebrew text was 
preserved without the points. Lamy observes, in reference to 
this matter {Apparatus Billions, lib. ii. cap. 6,; that the children 
of the Turks, Arabians. Persians, and, in hue, of all the 
Mahometans, learn to read without the points. The same 
method of preserving the true reading of Greek and Latin books, 
was scarcely less necessary at the time when these books were 
written as one word without the distinctions of words, pauses, 
&c. 

The third objection urged is taken troin the fact that in the 
Jlasora itself there are certain observations regarding the points, 
which would seem to show that the points were invented before 
the time of the Masorets. For example, there are words marked 
as being irregularly pointed. Xow, our adversaries will say, it 
cannot be supposed that the Masorets would point the words 
irregularly, and then subjoin observations on the violation of 
their own rules. The answer to this objection is, that the 
Masora was not the work of one doctor, or of one age. and hence, 
those who added to the Masora in later times remarked on the 
points which their predecessors invented. Again, they object 
from the words of the Gospel. Matthew, v. IS, " Iota unum ant 
unus apex. ? ' &c, one jot or one tilth ; and again, in Luke, xvi, 
17, *• Unum apioeni." one ■ tittle* where they understand apex, 



OF THE BIBLE. 



59 



a tittle, to mean a vowel point. The answer is, that apex or 
tittle does not mean a vowel point, bnt a small portion of a letter, 
as iota, or jot, designates the smallest of the letters. The testi- 
mony of St. Jerome is clear on this point, where he says that 
the letter "I Resh differs from *T Daleth, in apice. — Commen- 
tary on Abdjas, C. Unicnm, v. 1. A certain work called the 
Book of Zohar, is referred to among the other arguments which 
the advocates of the antiquity of the points adduce. But at 
present no one would appeal to such an authority on the sub- 
ject as the Book of Zohar. See the various notices of this book 
by Kichard Simon, in his Critical History of the Old Testament, 
book i, chapter 20. At the end of the chapter, and in several 
other parts of his work, he explains well the character of the 
book ; and as to its reputed antiquity, Yeith (Scriptura contra 
incredulos Propugnata, in lihros jEsdrce, in the part cited above) 
demonstrates that it is much more modern than the Jews would 
have us to believe. 

We have said enough on the antiquity of the vowel points, 
which is not defended at present either by numerous or by 
learned advocates. In the days of Buxtorf and Cappel the case 
was different. These have exhausted the arguments on both 
sides. Yv r alton also, in his Prolegomena on the London Polyglot, 
has dwelt at considerable length on the controversy, deciding, of 
course, against the antiquity of the points. — Proleg. Ill, section 
38. 

"We conclude this inquiry with the following appropriate ob- 
servations from Yeith (loco citato): — "Since the vowel points 
are not of divine authority, but a human invention of the rab- 
bins, who, long after the birth of Christ, added them to the 
text, lest the pronunciation might be quite forgotten, it is clear 
that these points, considered precisely by themselves, have not 
an irrefragable authority. lSTay, there are not wanting those 
who say, with Calmet, that the purity of the text has been 
sometimes corrupted by the Masorets out of hatred to the Chris- 
tian religion. In this, however, all are agreed, that the Maso- 
rets, with the exception of the places, which, according to the 
opinion of some, they have corrupted out of hatred to the Chris- 
tian religion, were very diligent and even minute in preserving 
in the genuine state the other Hebrew texts of the scripture. 
Whence it follows that the Hebrew text can be of the greatest 
service in the explanation of our Latin version ; and that the in- 
terpreters of the bible can derive great assistance in their labours 
from a knowledge of Hebrew. They must never lose sight, 
however, of the authority of the Latin vulgate approved of by 
the Council of Trent." 



60 



OF THE PEIXCIPAL PRINTED EDITIONS 



DISSERTATION V. 



OF THE PRINCIPAL PRINTED EDITIONS OF THE HEBREW 
BIBLE. 

The editions of the Hebrew bible which first claim a notice here, 
are those called the Sonci nates editions. They got this name on 
account of having been printed by Jews, of a family which came 
originally from Germany, and established themselves at Soncino, 
a town in Lombardy, between Cremona and Brescia. They were 
the first Hebrew printers. Some of them afterwards established 
themselves in Bologna, Brescia, and Bimini. The first of these 
editions was printed in 1488, at Soncino, in folio; the text is 
pointed and accented. Proru a Hebrew subscription at the end 
of the Pentateuch we learn, among other things, the name of 
the editor, Abraham Ben Chajiin. Biblical critics have not been 
able to discover what manuscripts were used in preparing this 
edition. This was the first edition ever printed of the entire 
Hebrew bible. The next Soncinates edition is that printed at 
Brescia, in 1494. iu octavo. It was, from this edition that 
Luther made his German translation of the bible. The third and 
last of the so-called Socinates editions, was printed in 1517, in 
folio, without the name of any place. — See Le Long, by Masch. 
Pars. 1, cap. 1, p. 5, et seq. The next great edition of the 
Hebrew bible is that in the Complutensian Polyglot, printed in 
1514-17, and taken from seven 1ISS. We have next to mention 
the editions printed by Daniel Bomberg, at Venice : there were 
several of these, some in folio and some in quarto. The most 
remarkable of these editions is the second of his rabbinical 
bibles : by a rabbinical bible is meant one in which the text is 
accompanied with the commentaries of the rabbins. This second 
rabbinical Bible of Bomberg's, was printed in 1526, four volumes, 
in folio. — Le Long, by Masch.' Pars. 1. cap. i, p. 100. It was 
published by E. Jacob Ben Chayim. This edition, the Complu- 
tensian Polyglot edition, and the Soncino edition of 1488, are 
the three primary printed editions of the Hebrew bible, being 
the bases of all the others ; but of the three, that which has been 
principally followed in our modern printed bibles is the Bomberg 
edition. " The text of the Bomberg edition," says Davidson, — 
{Biblical Criticism* p. 222,)" is principally formed after the 
Masora, but Spanish MSS. were employed in making it." The 



OF THE HEBREW BIBLE. 



(il 



editions of Kobert Stephens deserve to be mentioned : there are 
two of these, the first, four volumes, in quarto, Paris, 15*39-44. 
This edition, according to an authority quoted by Le Long, 
although remarkable for the beauty of the type, abounds in 
errata. The second edition of Stephens, printed also at Paris, is 
in seven volumes, 16mo ; it is printed, according to Le Long, 
" eleganthsime et sat corrected The next edition which we shall 
notice — and we follow the order of time — is that of Sebastian 
Munster; in this edition we have the Hebrew text with the 
Latin translation, made by Munster. It was the first Latin 
translation made by any of the Protestants. Santes Pagninus, 
a Catholic, had published, in 1528, a Latin translation, made by 
himself, of the Hebrew bible. The first volume of the first 
edition of Sebastian Munster' s bible, was printed in 1534 ; the 
second volume in 1535 ; the second edition was printed in 1546 : 
they were both printed at Basil, in folio. Passing over various 
other editions of the Hebrew bible, we may mention next, one 
that issued from the Plantinian press in Antwerp, in 1584 ; with 
this is printed the Latin translation of Santes Pagninus, revised 
and corrected by Ben Arias Montanus and some others. Le 
Long calls this editio eleganiissima. We come now to an important 
edition of the Hebrew bible, that published by Buxtorf at Basil, 
four volumes, folio, printed by Lewis Konig. It is one of the 
rabbinical bibles, Buxtorf having published, with the text, the 
commentaries of the celebrated Jewish rabbins, Jarchi, Aben Ezra, 
Kimehi, Levi Ben Gerson, and Saadias Haggaon. He subjoined, 
moreover, the Jerusalem Targum, the great Masora, corrected and 
amended by himself, the various readings of Ben Asher and Ben 
Napthali. Buxtorf also pointed the Chaldee paraphrase, following 
the analogy of the Chaldee in Daniel and Esdras. This edition is 
highly esteemed by Hebrew scholars, many of whom prefer it to 
any of the bibles printed by Bomberg. We may next mention a 
very celebrated edition of the Hebrew bible, printed at Amster- 
dam, by Joseph Athias, a Jewish printer of that city. There are 
two editions of this bible ; the first in 1661, the second in 1667 ; 
they are each in two volumes, octavo. John Leusden was 
engaged in their publication, and has prefixed Latin prefaces to 
them ; hence, we find these editions sometimes called the editions 
by Leusden — sometimes Athias' editions. Athias' edition is 
remarkable for being the first Hebrew bible in which the verses 
are numbered. The States of Holland rewarded Athias' s labours 
with a present of a golden chain, with a golden medallion pen- 
dent. We* may next mention the edition given by Daniel Ernest 
Jablonski at Berlin, in 1699, in quarto ; he has prefixed a 
diffuse and learned preface in Latin. The editor principally 



02 



OF THE PRINCIPAL PBINTED EDITIONS 



followed the second edition of Athias ; but he consulted, more- 
over, the principal editions then printed, together with several 
MSS. His text is very accurate, and he has added a selection 
of the most important readings, besides attending minutely to 
the points and accentuation ; hence, this edition is much 
esteemed. Be Rossi pronounces it to be one of the most correct 
and important editions of the Hebrew bible ever printed. 

We come now to Yan der Hooght's bible; a beautiful and 
correct edition. It was published in 1705, at Amsterdam and 
Utrecht, in two volumes, octavo. This edition has been so much 
followed in the editions of the Hebrew scriptures which have 
since been published, that it is not without reason regarded as 
the textus receptus of these scriptures. Yan der Hooght follows, 
in the text, the second edition of Athias. He has added notes, 
and prefixed a long preface in Latin. At the end he gives the 
principal differences of reading which he observed between 
the editions of Athias, Bomberg, Plantin, and others. The 
printing of this edition is remarkably well executed, not only in 
the letters, but also in the points, which are uncommonly clear 
and distinct. The next edition which claims our attention is 
that published by John Henry Michaelis, in 1720. This edition 
is accompanied with the readings of twenty-four editions, which 
Michaelis examined, as also with the readings of five MSS. in 
the library at Erfurt, which he collated. The text is printed 
from Jahlonski's bible, (Berlin, 1699.) This edition has been 
always highly esteemed. Davidson, however, says, " that the 
collations of this editor were hasty, and are not to be depended 
on as strictly accurate." — Biblical Criticism, p. 223. It is hard 
to admit that this censure is well founded, when we consider 
what Cardinal Wiseman tells us, viz., that it was after thirty 
years of incessant labour that Michaelis brought out his edition. — 
Lectures on the Connexion between Science and Revealed Religion. 
Lecture x. An edition of the Hebrew bible given at Yienna, in 
1743, by a learned Jesuit, named Lewis de Biel, deserves our 
notice. It is in four volumes, large octavo, and a highly valu- 
able edition, although but little known in this country. It is 
ornamented 'with vignettes, and the initial letters are on copper 
engraving, representing some fact in sacred history, to which the 
immediate subject is applicable. The editor has given, with the 
Hebrew, two Latin versions — that of the vulgate edition, (1592,) 
and that of Arias Montanus. 

A well-known edition of the Hebrew bible is that given by 
the Eev. Charles Francis Houbigant, an Oratorian. It was pub- 
lished at Paris, in 1753, in four volumes folio, with a Latin ver- 
sion and prolegomena. The text of this edition is that of Yan 



OF THE HEBREW BIBLE. 



63 



der Hooght, without the points. Several MSS. were occasion- 
ally consulted by the author, but it is supposed that he did not 
collate any one manuscript throughout, seeing that he has only 
noted a few select manuscript readings. He gives in the margin 
of the Pentateuch the Samaritan readings. The Latin version is 
made by Houbigant himself, and expresses such a text as his cri- 
tical emendations appeared to him to recommend. The work is 
splendidly printed, but the editor has been much blamed for the 
excessive use of conjectural emendation. Cardinal Wiseman, 
who is by no means disposed to be a harsh critic, speaks severely 
ot the work. — Lectures on the Connexion, fyc, Lecture x. 

The greatest and most valuable critical edition of the Hebrew 
bible that has been ever printed, is that given by the learned 
Benjamin Kennicott, and printed at the Clarendon press, Oxford, 
in 1776 and 1780, two volumes, folio. The learned editor occu- 
pied more than ten years in preparing the materials for this 
great work. He collated for it not only all the MSS. in Eng- 
land and Ireland, but extended his researches over all the conti- 
nent. Whilst the materials were in course of preparation for 
his edition, Kennicott published each year an annual report, in- 
forming the public of the progress that had been made in the 
examination and collation of MSS., editions, rabbinical writings, 
&c; for he did not confine himself solely to the collation of MSS. 
Everywhere his undertaking met with favour, and nowhere 
more than at Rome, as he himself gratefully acknowledges. In 
preparing the materials, Kennicott was assisted by Professor 
Bruns, of the University of Helmstaclt, who, under his direction 
and at his expense, collated three hundred and fifty MSS., 
whilst Dr. Kennicott himself collated two hundred and fifty : this 
would make the whole number of MSS. collated six hundred. 
But, as Charles Butler {Eorce Billica) observes, "There is rea- 
son to suppose that some of the MSS. were confounded and num- 
bered more than once ; and hence it has been asserted that the 
number of them should be reduced to about five hundred and 
eighty." Cardinal Wiseman {in the lecture quoted above) states 
the number to be five hundred and eighty-one. The text of 
this edition is Yan der Hooght's, with which all the MSS. were 
collated. In this collation variations in the points were over- 
looked, and, therefore, Yan der Hooght's text is given without 
the points. We cannot pass without notice here the labours of 
John Bernard de Rossi, a Catholic professor of Parma, whose 
labours have contributed so much to fix the reading of the He- 
brew text, although' he has not given himself an edition of the 
bible. He collected a great number of MSS. and rare editions 
of the Hebrew text, and published the various readings which 



64 



OF THE PRINCIPAL PRINTED EDITIONS 



they furnished, as supplementary to Xennicott's collection. The 
first volume of this supplement was published by De Eossi in 
1784. In this volume he gives the catalogue of four hundred 
and seventy-nine MSS. in his own possession. Before the com- 
pletion of the fourth volume, in 1788, his collection had increased 
to six hundred and twelve. In 1808 he published a supplement- 
ary vohinie to the preceding four, in which sixty-eight new ma- 
nuscripts are described, making in all six hundred and eighty 
Hebrew manuscripts ; that is, about one hundred more than 
Xennicott had collected. De Rossi's various readings have not 
only been taken from the 3ISS. and editions of the Hebrew text, 
he has also collated for this purpose Samaritan 3ISS. and ancient 
versions. Davidson (Biblical Criticism, p. 225,) says of De Bos- 
si's work : " This immense collection was made with marvellous 
industry and singular care by one who displayed a better judg- 
ment than Xennicott in such matters." 

An edition of the Hebrew bible, which, for the purposes of 
common use may supply the want of the splendid but expensive 
editions and collations of Houbigant, Kennicott, and De Eossi, is 
one which was printed under the inspection of Doederlein and 
Meisaer, in 1793. at Leipsic, in octavo. It is usually bound in 
two volumes. The collection of various readings makes it valu- 
able, but as to the text of the edition, Jahn asserts that it is very 
incorrect. Jahn has himself given an edition of the Hebrew 
bible, which is much esteemed, in four volumes, octavo, Yienna, 
1806. With the text, this eminent oriental scholar has -given 
the most important various readings selected from the collations 
of Xennicott, De Eossi, and others. The text is that of Van der 
Hooght, from which the editor has departed only in nine or ten 
places, in which many other editions had preceded him, and 
which are supported by numerous and very weighty authorities. 
We have now noticed the most important printed editions of the 
Hebrew bible. Xo doubt, since that of Jahn, various other edi- 
tions have issued from the press, but in these the text of Yan der 
Hooght has been so generally followed, at the same time that 
they add so little to the materials for the criticism of the He- 
brew text, that we shall content ourselves for the present with 
what has been said of the printed editions of the Hebrew bible. 
And if, in our notice of the editions even which preceded that of 
Jahn, we have passed over some that are remarkable, such as 
those that are printed in some of the Polyglot bibles, this is to 
be ascribed to the exact manner in which the editors of these 
have followed respectively some preceding edition. 



ON THE GREEK 1CAHTJSCBIPTS, ETC. 



65 



DISSERTATION VI. 



05 THE GREEK 31 AXE SCRIPTS OE THE NE"W TESTAMENT. 

have said something, in a preceding dissertation, of the 
manner in which the writing of the ancient Greek manuscripts 
has been executed. In the present dissertation we purpose to 
discuss briefly the claims which the known MSS. of the Greek 
Testament have to be considered faithful representatives of their 
original— or rather, to offer a few general observations on the 
critical value of the Greek MSS. of the Xew Testament. It is 
clear, in the first place, that we have no longer the autographs 
of any of the sacred writers ; and it is equally clear that the 
manuscript copies which we have, and which are very numerous, 
speaking of the Xew Testament, are more or less valuable in pro- 
portion as they represent, with greater or less fidelity, the auto- 
graphs. But to decide on the rival claims, in this matter, of 
the MSS. which have been collated, is an exceedingly difficult 
undertaking, and one in which different critics have arrived at 
different and even opposite conclusions. "We shall simply notice 
the opinions of others, who have devoted much time to the dry 
labour of examining MSS. And here, in the first place, it must 
be said that the antiquity of a manuscript must have great weight 
in recommending it, because, in the progress of time, as copies 
are taken from, and succeed to copies, mistakes are naturally 
multiplied. However, it will sometimes happen that a more 
modern MS. will be preferable to a more ancient one, inasmuch 
as the more modern one may be an exceedingly careful transcript 
of a codex, which, having otherwise much to recommend it, was 
more ancient than either of these. Richard Simon, in his 
Critical History of the Xew Testament, — (chap, xxx) — gives the 
preference to manuscripts made in the Greek churches over those 
which have been transcribed by the Latins before the time at 
which St. Jerome made his correction of the old Latin vulgate, 
although these latter manuscripts may be more ancient than 
any of the others. He considers that these manuscripts made by 
the Latins were not remarkable for their accuracy, although he 
does not ascribe the cause of this to any wish on the part of 
those who transcribed them to render ithem conformable to 
the Latin ; on the contrary, he blames the opinion of Erasmus 
and some other critics, who thought that such manuscripts had 

E 



66 



ON THE GKEEK MANUSCRIPTS OE 



been altered to make them agree with the Latin. Simon thinks 
that Latin copyists did not scruple much about filling up what 
appeared to be a chasm in the narrative of one evangelist, by 
inserting a portion of the parallel passage as it was found in 
another evangelist. Something similar, he asserts, has been 
done by them with the Epistles of St. Paul, though not, of 
course, to the same extent, because parallel passages do not so 
easily occur there. Simon considers that the Codex Cantabrigi- 
ensis or Codex Bezre, which the critical editors of the Greek 
Testament at a later period generally designate by the letter D, 
is one of these manuscripts which have been made by Latin 
copyists. He considers that the Latin translation which accom- 
panies it belongs to the ante-Hieronymian vulgate, and he, in 
comformity with his judgment on such manuscripts, undervalues 
both the Greek and Latin of the manuscript. We may observe 
here, as an example of the difficulty which surrounds such criti- 
cal questions, that all the placita of Simon regarding this manu- 
script, although they have been assented to by some of the critics 
who have come after him, have yet been vehemently assailed by 
others. We see that the readings of this manuscript have been 
most highly esteemed by some ; and again, if the Latin transla« 
tion which accompanies it really appertains to the ancient Latin 
vulgate, (which we do not admit,) that vulgate, we shall see, 
has been so much esteemed by some even of the best Protestant 
critics, that they would look upon the Greek text which it re- 
presents as the best of all. Having said so much about the 
value which attaches to manuscripts in consequence of their an- 
tiquity, we have now to consider whether, when the ancient 
manuscripts are divided upon a reading, the reading of the greater 
number of manuscripts ought always to be preferred. There is 
no doubt but it may happen in some instances that the true 
reading will be found in the smaller number of manuscripts, as 
we shall see more at length in the Dissertation on the Elements 
of .Biblical Criticism. Put then the question may be again asked 
—considering manuscripts as witnesses in favour of a certain 
reading, does it appear that the greater number of MSS. always 
implies the greater number of independent manuscript witnesses 
in favour of the reading which they contain. It will be readily 
admitted that sometimes two or more MSS. may be so manifestly 
transcripts one from the other, that all taken together will not 
present more than one independent manuscript witness of a 
reading. But, then, what degree of similarity between manu- 
scripts ought to reduce their combined testimony to that of one 
independent witness ? And again, amidst the different classes 
of similar MSS., what class ought to be looked on as presenting 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



67 



the best readings, these are the vexatce qucestiones of the critics, 
as may be inferred from all that has been written about the 
families of manuscripts. We must here, therefore, devote some 
space to the notice of this matter— -of the families of manuscripts. 
According to the opinion which much more commonly prevails 
among the critics, numerous Greek manuscripts, which have 
been collated, are found, although exhibiting slight discrepancies, 
yet so to agree in various characteristics, that they are proved 
to belong to one class or family ; whilst many other manuscripts 
so differ in their characteristics from these, at the same time that 
they agree among themselves, that they are seen to constitute a 
distinct family. These families are commonly termed recensions, 
because they are supposed to represent — each a distinct revised 
edition of the text. However, whether such distinct revised 
editions of the text have been the models of these families re- 
spectively, is a question among the critics, and hence some would 
prefer in this matter the name of family to that of recension ; 
family merely designating that class of manuscripts which was 
in use in a particular part of the church. Those who admit 
families of manuscripts, are not agreed upon the number of these 
— some counting only two, others three, and others four. Eefore 
proceeding farther, we may observe how important this enquiry 
regarding the existence of families is considered in reference to 
the criticism of the Greek text, for if it be once admitted that 
manuscripts are to be thus classified, then it follows that some- 
times the reading of three manuscripts, for example, ought to 
outweigh the reading of forty ; because the three may represent 
three distinct families, whereas the forty may all belong to one. 
Bengel, a German Protestant critic, towards the beginning of 
the eighteenth century, appears to have been the first to whom 
the idea of this distribution of manuscripts into families — which 
very name he used — suggested itself. But Griesbach, well 
known as a critical editor of the Greek Testament, was the 
first who examined this matter profoundly. According to 
him the Greek manuscripts are reducible to three classes or 
recensions. First, the Alexandrine. Second, the Occidental or 
Western ; and third, the Byzantine or Oriental. Michaelis, who 
otherwise agrees with Griesbach in this classification of the 
manuscripts, adds a fourth recension, which he calls the Eclessene. 
The first or Alexandrine recension, is so termed by Griesbach, 
because, in its characteristic readings, it agrees with the quota- 
tions of the early Alexandrine writers, particularly Origen and 
Clement of Alexandria, and is the recension which the Greeks of 
Egypt followed. Second, the "W estern recension is that to which 
the quotations of Tertullian and Cyprian answer, and which wt : 



68 



ox the gheee: xaktscripts of 



followed by the Christians of Africa, Italy, Gaul, and the west of 
Europe generally. Third, the Byzantine or Constantinopolitan 
recension comprises those manuscripts which are supposed to 
have been taken from an edition of the text, which was made 
perhaps about the end of the fourth century, and which came 
into general use in Constantinople and the several churches 
appertaining to the patriarchate of that city. Fourth, the 
Edessene recension, which Michaeiis adds to the preceding, com- 
prises the manuscripts which were made from that edition of the 
text that is represented by the Peschito or old Syriae version of 
the Xew Testament. Mr. 2solan, an English Protestant minister, 
classifies the manuscripts differently. He makes three divisions 
of them. The first class is represented, according to him, in the 
old Latin vulgate before it received the corrections either of 
Eusebius (as he says) or St. Jerome. These manuscripts he con- 
siders the best. The second class of manuscripts contain a text 
which is represented in a correction of the old Latin vulgate, 
which this author ascribes to Eusebius of Tercelli : and the third 
class of manuscripts is represented in the Latin vulgate as cor- 
rected by St. Jerome. Hug, a German Catholic critic, makes 
three divisions of the manuscripts also, but after a different plan 
from any of the preceding. Some critics will admit only two 
families or recensions, contending that what are called the Alex- 
andrine and Western recensions ought to be considered as but 
one. Matthsei, formerly professor at Moscow, who has given a 
critical edition of the Greek Testament, contends that all Greek 
manuscripts properly belong only to one recension or family : the 
manuscripts of this one family he calls codices textus perpetui, 
and any manuscript that cannot be associated with this class he 
looks upon as corrupt and of no value. Finally-, some later 
critics assert that all these attempts to reduce manuscripts to 
classes or families have proved utterly futile and vain. Among 
others by whom this last opinion, as well as the preceding, is 
noticed, may be mentioned Professor Davidson. — Biblical Criti- 
cism, lecture 20. 

Those critics, who have agreed in holding, that manuscripts 
are reducible to certain classes, or families, differ again among 
themselves as to the relative merits of these classes. Thus, tor 
example, Professor Scholz of Bonn, who admits but two classes 
of manuscripts — first, the Alexandrine, which, according to him, 
comprises in it the 'Western of Griesbach ; and second, the Con- 
stantinopolitan — gives the preferance to the Constantinopolitan ; 
whilst Griesbach decides in favour of the Alexandrine. We 
purpose to say a few words in our next dissertation on the merits 
of these two opinions. 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



69 



We shall, for the present, conclude this subject, with a brief 
notice of some of the principal manuscripts of the Greek Testa- 
ment. Manuscripts, in regard to their age, are divided into 
uncial — or those written in capital letters — as all the old manu- 
scripts were ; and cursive, or small-letter manuscripts. The 
modern German critics, with Hug, arrange them in three classes : 
first, those that preceded the practice of stichometry, which word 
means that division of the text into lines or sentences, which we 
have referred to already, in speaking of the ancient division of 
the text ; second, the stichometrical ; third, such as were written 
after stichometry had ceased to be used. The late critical 
editors have designated the manuscripts by the letters of the 
alphabet A. B. C, &c. The order in which the letters have 
been assigned to the different manuscripts was not intended to 
mark their age or internal value, as Davidson observes. — (Bibli- 
cal Criticism, lecture 2.) It is more probable that it was done 
at first arbitrarily, and that it came to be universally adopted as a 
convenient abbreviation. 

We shall now describe a few of these manuscripts. "First, 
the manuscript marked A in Wetstein, Griesbach, and Scholz's 
critical editions, is called the Alexandrine. It was presented by 
the well-known Cyril Lucar, patriarch of Constantinople, to 
Charles I. of England, and is preserved in the British Museum. 
Besides the New Testament, it contains the Septuagint version of 
the Old. The New Testament is defective in the beginning, com- 
mencing with the twenty-fifth chapter and sixth verse of St. Mat- 
thew's gospel. Besides this defect, it also wants a portion of St. 
John's gospel, and some chapters of the second epistle to the Corin- 
thians. It is written in uncial or capital letters, without any 
accents or marks of aspiration. It is one of those, says Hug, which 
is more ancient than stichometry. Hug refers it to the fifth cen- 
tury, although many critics have assigned it a more ancient 
date. A fac- simile of the New Testament portion has been pub- 
lished at London, in 1786, by Dr. Woide. The Old Testament 
division has been since published, at London also, in 1819, under 
the superintendence of Mr. Baber. Second, the codex B. 
This is called the Vatican manuscript, because it is preserved in 
the Vatican library at Home. It is written on parchment or 
vellum, and, like the preceding, it contains the Old and New 
Testaments ; the former of which was printed from it in 1587, 
by order of Sixtus Quintus. This manuscript is defective both 
in the Old and New Testaments : of the Old it wants a great 
portion of Genesis and some of the Psalms ; and of the New, it 
only contains the Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, St. Paul's 
Epistles, except those to Timothy, Titus and Philemon, and the 



70 



OX THE GEEEK MAXTSCEIPTS OP 



latter part of the Epistle to the Hebrews, viz., from the four- 
teenth verse of the ninth chapter to the end. It is written in 
uncial or capital letters, and without the^ divisions of chapters, 
verses, or words. It is one of the ante-stichometrical class. 
Hug, who has examined it with care, and described it in a work 
written expressly for the purpose, — De Antiquitate Codicis 
Vatican! , Commentaiio, Friburgi, 1809, in 4to., — assigns it a 
higher antiquity than he allows to the Alexandrine. He refers 
it to the fourth century. Others are not willing to allow it so 
great an antiquity. However, as Marsh infers from the omis- 
sion of the Eusebian Kephalaia and TitJoi, it appears at least to 
have been written before the close of the fifth century. It has 
been long a matter of dispute which of these two manuscripts, 
A or B, ought to be preferred, both on the head of antiquity, 
and of internal excellence. At present, however, the decision of 
the learned appears to be generally in favour of B — the Yatican 
manuscript — on both these points. We may therefore justly 
consider it the most valuable Greek manuscript that has been yet 
collated. Third, the codex C, called the Codex rescriptus 
Ephremi. is an old and valuable manuscript written on vellum. 
It is called rescriptus, (or Palimpsest,) because the original 
writing has been in a great part removed to make way for the 
works of St. Ephrem, the Syrian ; yet the original writing has 
not been so effectually removed as not to be still traceable. 
Besides the iNew Testament, it appears to have contained 
originally the Septuagint version of the Old, portions of which 
still remain. In the ]S"ew there are many chasms, which have 
been pointed out by Wetstein, and after him by Griesbach and 
Scholz. It is written in the uncial letters without accents or 
division of words. Hug, who places it in the ante-stichometri- 
cal class, makes it as ancient as the fifth century. Others do 
not assign it so high an antiquity, but it is generally admitted 
to be as old, at least, as the seventh century. This codex is 
also termed Regius, from being preserved in the royal library at 
Paris. Eourth, we next notice the Codex Cantahrigiensis or 
Be%cE, marked D, which has been already mentioned in this 
chapter. It is a Greek and Latin manuscript of the four Gospels 
and the Acts of the Apostles, written on vellum. It is preserved 
in the public library of the university of Cambridge, to which it 
was presented by Theodore Beza, in the year 1581. It is 
written in uncial letters, without accents or marks of aspiration, 
or spaces between the words. A splendid fac-simile of this codex 
was published by Dr. Xipling, at Cambridge, in 1793, 2 vols, 
folio. Many consider the Latin translation as presenting a por- 
tion of the old ante-Hieronymian version of the JS"ew Testament : 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



71 



a point which we shall examine more fully when treating of the 
ancient versions of the scripture. The age of this manuscript 
has been much contested. According to Scholz, it is not older 
than the eighth century. Michaelis, on the contrary, thinks 
that, perhaps, of all the manuscripts that are known it is the 
most ancient. It is written in crr^oi ; and, of course, Hug 
puts it in the stichometrical class. He makes it belong to the 
end of the fifth century. The critical value of this codex is also 
much disputed, as we have before observed. Fifth, next comes 
another codex, also marked D, but containing a different portion 
of the New Testament from the preceding. It is called the 
Codex Claromantanus, for it is said to have been procured by 
Beza from Clermont in France. It is a Greek-Latin copy of St. 
Paul's Epistles, written on vellum, and is preserved at present 
in the royal (or national) library at Paris. It is thought to have 
been written in the sixth or seventh century. It is written in 
the uncial letters, and has accents and marks of aspiration, but 
not a prima manu. It is written in <snyoi and, of course, Hug 
places it in the stichometrical class. Eichard Simon, Beza, and 
Mill have considered this to be the second part of the Codex 
Cantabrigiensis. "Wetstein is thought to have demonstrated the 
contrary ; but considering the way in which Simon proposes his 
opinion on the matter, I know not if he would admit that 
"Wetstein' s proof was conclusive against him. See his Critical 
History of the New Testament, chap. xxx. Sixth, E is the 
Codex Sangermanensis, a manuscript of St. Paul's Epistles, so 
called from having formerly belonged to the abbey of St. Ger- 
main des Pres in Paris. It is stichometrical : as is also Seventh, 
the Laudian, which is marked E, in like manner. It has its 
name from having been presented by Laud to the university of 
Oxford. It contains the greater part of the Acts of the Apostles, 
with a Latin version. The principal MSS. written after sticho- 
metry had been laid aside, are — First, the MS. of Cyprus now 
in the royal library at Paris. It is designated by K. It contains 
the four Gospels, written on parchment, in uncial oblong letters. 
This MS. is of the ninth century ; we find in it the accents and 
a certain punctuation, that is, a point used to mark the end of 
each sentence. Second, the Basil manuscript, preserved in the 
library of that city. It again is designated by E. It is of the 
ninth century ; written in capitals, with the points according to 
the present system of punctuation. Having now noticed the 
principal manuscripts of the Greek Testament, those that are 
the most ancient and the most highly valued, we conclude this 
subject for the present, and proceed to treat of the printed 
editions of the Greek Testament. 



72 



OF THE PEES'IEI) EDITIONS 



DISSERTATION VII. 



OP THE PRINTED EDITIONS OF THE G-EEEK TESTAMENT. 

The first printed, edition of the Greek Testament, that was pub- 
lished, was that edited by Erasmus, in 1516. It was printed in 
folio, at Basil, by Frobenius. Mascfts Le Long L 
Sacra, vol. i, part i. p. 281. It was printed after one manu- 
script only, with which the editor collated two others, all in 
cursive characters, and consequently not so old as the tenth 
century. — Glaive. Introduction, vol. ii. p. 445. It appears that 
his manuscript authority was particularly scanty in the Apoca- 
lypse : so that it is said that he was obliged to fill up some of the 
chasms there, by his own translations from the Latin vulgate. 
Erasmus gave four other editions of his Testament in 1519, 
1522. 152 7, 1535. The two last were altered in many places, 
especially in the Apocalypse, from the Complutensian edition. — 
Butlers Sore? Billica, section 11. 

Second. TTe give the second place to the edition of the Greek 
Testament printed in the Complutensian polyglot. For. although 
it bears date 1514. yet it was not allowed to be sold, generally 
before 1522. before which time Erasmus bad published more 
than one edition of his Greek Testament. This famous polyglot 
was edited at Complutum, Aleala) in Spain, under the auspices 
of the renowned Cardinal Ximenes. The editors had manuscripts 
sent to them from the Vatican library in Eome ; however, the 
Danish professor Birch, who collated very carefully the famous 
Vatican manuscript B, asserts, it was not one of those of which 
they availed themselves. They had a codex of the apostolical 
epistles, brought from the Isle of Ehodes. — See JIascli' s Le Long 
Billio. Sacra, vol. 1, part 1. p. 267. The manuscripts used by 
the Complutensian editors have been since lost. 

Third. [Next in order come the editions of the celebrated 
French printer, Robert Stephens ; he printed four editions — all 
remarkable for the beauty of the typography — in the years 1546, 
1549. 1550, and 1551. His son. Henry, published a fifth edi- 
tion in 1569. Among these editions, the first and third of Bo- 
be: t Stephens are the most remarkable. The first edition, which 
is in 16mo, is most beautifully printed, and is well known by 
the name of the Jlirincam edition — a name which it has received 
from the first words of Stephens' preface, which commenees " 



OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 



73 



mirificam regis nostri optimi et prcestantissimi principis liberali- 
tatem." Tlie third edition is in folio, and is remarkable for 
having the readings of sixteen manuscripts in the margin. It 
is also the edition with which the readings of the textus receptus 
generally agree. In the text of this edition, Stephens followed 
the fifth edition of Erasmus. 

The next editor of the Greek Testament whom we meet with 
is Theodore Beza ; whose editions have had a great influence 
upon the actual form of the Greek text. His first edition ap- 
peared in 1565, in folio. The text of this edition is the third of 
Stephens, altered in about fifty places. Four other editions were 
published by Beza in 1576, 1582,1589, and 1598. The text which 
he followed in the first edition has been altered more or less in 
the following editions, particularly in the three last. He has 
been accused of allowing his Calvinistic prejudices to influence 
him in the choice of readings. — Butler, Sorm Bihlicce, sec- 
tion 11. 

Kext in order come the famous Elzevir editions — the first of 
which was printed at Leyden in 1624. The editor of this and 
of the subsequent Elzevir editions is unknown ; hence these edi- 
tions are designated by the name of the printers (the Elzevirs). 
Besides the first edition, they gave four other editions of the text. 
In the preface to their second edition, printed in 1633, they de- 
nominate their text the textus receptus — a name which it has 
ever since retained. The editor does not appear to have consulted 
any Greek manuscripts. The text which he gives is partly 
that of the third edition of Stephens, and partly that of Beza. 
This edition of the Elzevirs was soon reprinted, and circulated 
through various countries, so that it is styled the common Greek 
text, as well as the received text : and we see now how the his- 
tory of the common Greek text is traced back through the edi- 
tions of Beza and the third of Stephens, to the fifth edition of 
Erasmus, and through that, as far as the Apocalypse is concerned, 
to the Complutensian polyglot. 

Walton, not confining himself to the received text, took the 
third edition of Bobert Stephens for the New Testament text of 
his polyglot, comparing with it the readings of the Alexandrian 
manuscript, and he has moreover given, in the sixth volume of 
his polyglot, a great number of various readings, drawn from 
many manuscripts. 

The London polyglot was published in 1657, in six volumes 
folio. — See Glair e, Introduction, torn. 1, p. 446, Paris, 1839. 

"We have next to notice the edition of the Greek Testament 
superintended by the Protestant bishop of Oxford, Dr. Eell. 
This edition was published in 1675, at Oxford. It was accom- 



74 



OF THE PRINTED EDITIONS 



panied with a collection of various readings drawn from ancient 
versions and numerous manuscripts. However, many of the 
manuscripts are not considered to have been of much critical 
value, and the edition has fallen into disrepute, having been 
eclipsed by the famous edition which we have to notice next. 
That edition is the one given by Dr. Mill, printed at Oxford, in 
folio, in 1707; and the above-mentioned Dr. Pell rendered a 
much greater service to sacred criticism by engaging Hill to la- 
bour at this work, and by assisting him in the undertaking, than 
by bringing out his own edition. — See Grlaire, in place cited above. 
The text which Mill took for his edition is that of the third edi- 
tion of Stephens, but the editor accompanied it with a much 
greater number of various readings than is to be found in any 
previous edition. He consulted for this purpose the manuscripts 
of TTalton, Fell, and many others. The extracts that had been 
made from ancient versions he revised and increased, adding nu- 
merous quotations from the ancient fathers. To the work he 
prefixed learned prologomena, This immense apparatus cost the 
editor thirty years of incessant labour, and lie only survived its 
publication for fourteen days. This work opened a new era in 
the criticism of the New Testament. 

Ludolph Kuster published at Amsterdam, in 1710, a new 
edition of Mill's Testament, having collated for the purpose va- 
rious new manuscripts, particularly the Codex Ephreini, or C, 
which is preserved in the royal library at Paris. 

Bengel, a learned German of TTurtemberg, gave a new edi- 
tion of the Greek Testament in 1734. He did not confine him- 
self to the received text, but altered it wherever he thought that 
it might be improved ; however, he did not insert in the text 
any reading that was not to be found in some printed edition. 
The only part in which he departed from this rule, was in the 
Apocalypse. Under the text, he placed some select readings; 
but the whole collection of various readings, and his own senti- 
ments upon them, he reserved for his apparatus criticus, which 
he subjoined to his edition of the text. In the first part of this 
apparatus, he gave the rules of criticism ; in the second, the prin- 
ciples which ought to direct one in the choice of readings ; and 
in the third part, an answer to the difficulties which might be 
objected against his work. Bengel, as has been observed before, 
was the first person to whom the idea appears to have occurred, 
of reducing all the manuscipts to a small number of distinct fami- 
lies. He reckoned but two of them, the African and the Asiatic. 
Bengel' s labours in the matter of sacred criticism were highly 
applauded by the Lutherans, to which sect he belonged. These 
labours, however, were destined to be soon eclipsed by the work 



OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 



7:> 



of another Protestant critic, John James Wetstein, whose famous 
edition of the New Testament was published at Amsterdam in 
1751 and 1752, in two volumes, folio. — See Butler, Jlorce Bibliea. 
Glaire, Introduction, places cited above. Wetstein adopted for his 
text the editio recepta of the Elzevirs. His collection of various 
readings far surpasses that of Mill or Bengel. He examined the 
manuscripts with his own eyes, and collected many which had 
escaped the researches of those who had preceded him in the cri- 
ticism of the New Testament. He added to the known readings 
of the ancient versions those of the Philoxenian Syriac version. 
He has, moreover, brought together a multitude of passages 
drawn from profane authors, Jewish rabbins, and fathers of the 
church, intended by him to bear on the explanation of the sacred 
text. The religious notions of the author, and the manifest 
want of a cool judgment which he displays, must be allowed to 
detract from the merit of this work. 

The next edition which we have to notice is that given by the 
celebrated Germ an critic, Griesbach. He first published the 
New Testament in 1775-1777, at Halle, in two volumes, octavo. 
Griesbach adopted the idea of Bengel regarding the families or 
recensions of manuscripts, and he has put it forward in a very 
imposing manner. He did not adhere to the received text, but 
altered it wherever he thought that a comparison of the docu- 
ments which he possessed justified him in doing so. As to 
various readings, Griesbach' s object was to give a choice collec- 
tion of those produced by Mill, Bengel, and Wetstein, together 
with those extracted by himself from various quarters, omitting 
all such as are trifling in themselves, supported by little 
authority, or evidently only errata. Home has a lengthened 
notice of Griesbach' s edition. — Introduction, vol. ii, appendix, 
p. 21, seventh edition. Griesbach is praised by all for his 
learning, but he is censured for the liberty which he has some- 
times taken with the text. Between the years 1782-88 Matthaei, 
a professor at Moscow, published a new edition of the Greek 
Testament, in twelve volumes, octavo. His text is founded 
chiefly on the collation of more than a hundred Moscow MSS. 
which he was the first to examine. It comes very near the 
received text, both of these being in reality founded upon that 
junior family of MSS. which passes by the name of Byzantine 
or Constantinopolitan. Matthasi, who declares himself the 
enemy of the system of families or recensions altogether, speaks 
with great contempt of the ancient manuscripts as compared 
with those which he followed. However, his judgment in 
giving such preference to the Moscow MSS. has been condemned 
by the generality of critics. 



76 



OF THE PKIXTED EDITIONS 



"We have next to notice an edition of the Greek Testament, 
given by a learned Catholic professor at Vienna, Francis Charles 
Alter. This edition is enriched with the various readings 
of more than twenty MSS. preserved in the library of that city. 
The edition is in two volumes, octavo, and was published in the 
years 1786, 1787. Alter took as the basis of his text a Vienna 
manuscript, marked Mo. 1, in the catalogue of the MSS. of the 
Imperial library, made by the famous Peter Lambecius. Alter 
styles it the Codex Yindobonensis. He has corrected it occa- 
sionally from the edition published by Robert Stephens in 1546, 
subjoining at the end of each volume, a list of those corrections, 
under the title of vitia codicis vindobonensis : besides the readings 
already mentioned, drawn from the Greek manuscripts, he added 
the readings of the Coptic version, also those of the Slavonian 
version, and of two ancient Latin versions preserved in the 
Imperial library. Alter is blamed for having attached so much 
importance to the Codex Yindobonensis as to have made it the 
basis of his text, and also for the inconvenient mode in which he 
has arranged the various readings, which renders it necessary for 
one, who wishes to compare them together, to search them out 
in different places of the work. — Butler, JZbrce BibliccB, sec. 
11th; Glaive, Introduction, torn. 1, p. 449. In noticing the 
principal editions of the Greek Testament, we cannot pass over 
the work of Professor Birch, of Copenhagen. He collated for 
his edition of the Greek Testament the famous Vatican manu- 
script, besides many other MSS. preserved in the libraries of 
Rome, and of various other cities of Europe — he collected, more- 
over, the readings of the Syriac versions, and prefixed to his 
work learned prologomena. He published the first volume, 
which contains the four Gospels, in 1788, but a great number of 
the copies of this first volume, as well as the materials of the 
second, were burned in a calamitous fire at Copenhagen in 1795. 
This misfortune was the reason why Birch confined himself to 
the publishing of the various readings of his manuscripts, on 
the Acts, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse. As to the text of 
this edition of the gospels, it is based upon the third edition of 
Stephens. It was with the help of these new materials that 
Griesbach brought out his second edition of the Greek Testament. 
It appeared in two volumes, large octavo, in the years 1796 and 
1806, with the imprint on the title page of each volume, of 
London and Halle. In addition to the various readings given in 
his first edition, Griesbach collated for his second all the Latin 
versions published by Sabatier and Blanchini : he has, moreover, 
corrected the mistakes made by Mill, Bengel, and "Wetstein, in 
their quotations from the oriental versions — he has inserted the 



OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 



77 



principal readings collected by Mattheei, Birch, and Alter — he 
has given the readings, moreover, of the Sahidic version, and he 
had collations made for him of the Armenian and Sclavonic 
versions. Undoubtedly, Griesbach has brought together here a 
vast quantity of materials bearing upon the criticism of the New 
Testament. Griesbach' s judgment, however, on the relative 
value of his materials, and on the selection of the true reading, 
has not found favour even with many protestants. 

As it is not our intention to notice all the editions of the 
New Testament, we pass over many minor ones, to notice the 
great critical edition of the Greek Testament brought out by Dr. 
Scholz, one of the Catholic professors at Bonn. This work, 
which forms two volumes in quarto, has been published at 
Leipsic. The first volume, containing the four Gospels, made 
its appearance in 1830, and the second, containing the Acts of 
the Apostles, the Epistles of St. Paul, the Catholic Epistles, and 
the Apocalypse, in 1836. The prologomena prefixed to the 
work consists of one hundred and seventy-two pages. In it the 
learned editor gives ample information respecting the codices, 
versions, fathers, and councils, which he used as authorities, 
together with a history of the text, and an exposition or defence 
of his peculiar system of classification of MSS. Scholz spent 
twelve years in preparing the materials for his work. He visited 
the libraries of the principal cities of Europe, and in addition to 
these, the libraries of the Greek monasteries, of Jerusalem, of St. 
Saba, and the Isle of Patmos. He collated, either entirely or 
in part, six hundred and six manuscripts not previously collated 
by any editor of the New Testament. As we observed in another 

place, Scholz refers all the MSS. to two recensions or families ■ 

the Alexandrian or African, and the Asiatic or Constantinopolitan 
— in other words, the occidental (same as African), and oriental : 
and the chief difference between the editions of Scholz and 
Griesbach proceeds from this, that Scholz gives the preference 
to the oriental family of MSS., while Griesbach prefers the 
western. In conformity with this preference for the oriental 
MSS., Scholz has given a text that comes much nearer the 
textus receptus than Griesbach' s. For, as his principles have led 
him to give a preference to the more modern MSS. over the 
ancient, hence that close approximation of his text to the 
received text, which has been confessedly formed upon a few 
junior MSS. — belonging, according to the generally-received 
system of families, to the Constantinopolitan class. As a matter 
of course, the admirers of the English Protestant authorised 
version have generally received with great approbation the views 
of Dr. Scholz, inasmuch as these views tend to support the 



78 



OF THE PEIXTED EDITIONS 



peculiar readings of that text which is represented in this 
English version ; a version that has been so much extolled by 
Protestants above that English translation of the Latin vulgate, 
which is in use among the Catholics of these countries. Yet 
many Protestant critics, even in these countries, contend that 
Scholz has advanced no sufficient reason to justify the preference 
which he has given to the junior codices; and hence they con- 
tinue, with the generality of critics, to prefer those ancient MSS. 
which are placed in the Alexandrian or western family, of which 
our ancient Latin version is one of the representatives. Catholic 
writers, who have examined M. Scholz' s performance carefully, 
have spoken severely of it. Eor example, Eather Secchi, a Jesuit, 
in a review of the work, published in the Annali delle Scien%e 
Religiose Compilati dalV Ab.Ant. de Zuca, vol. 6, Num. 16, 
1838, Boma; and the Abbe Glaire, Introduction aux Lures de 
IJAncienet du Nouveau Testament, torn. 1, p. 453. Glaire says, 
44 There are, in effect, certain principles and certain assertions, 
which a good Catholic sees with pain in the works of M. 
Scholz." 

A Greek Testament has been brought out in these countries 
not many years since, which deserves to be noticed, because it 
contains in reality a new recension of the Greek text. This 
edition is entitled n Ka/^ Aia^n. The Greek Testament : 
with English notes, critical, philological, and exegetical. By 
the Pev. S. T. Bloonifield, D.D., Cambridge and London, 1832, 
2 vols. 8vo. My edition of this work is the third, ''carefully 
corrected, greatly enlarged, and considerably improved." London, 
2 vols. 8vo. This work is highly praised by Protestants ; and 
doubtless it must be said that, considering the religion of the 
editor, he has, for the most part, brought an impartial mind to 
the examination of the ordinary Greek text. It does not belong 
to our present purpose to speak of his notes. Of course, like all 
similar works by Protestants, they are replete with incorrect 
views of the meaning of the text. 

In 1850 Bloomfield published a supplemental volume to this 
edition of the Greek Testament, containing additional annotations, 
critical, philological, and explanatory. The critical notes in this 
volume appear to have been composed with a special reference 
to two new editions of the Greek Testament — one by Lachmann 
and the other by Tischendorf— which made their appearance 
subsequently to the previous labours of Bloomfield in the 
criticism of the Greek text, and which have obtained great vogue 
in Germany. In consequence of the additional light which he 
supposes that these editors have thrown on the state of the text, 
he'has not unfrequently altered or modified his former opinions 



OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 



79 



as to certain readings. Bloomfield appears to think that both 
Lachinann and Teschendorf have exercised a licentious criticism 
— and that the former particularly has treated the received text 
with a degree of disregard that could only be expected from a 
German Protestant. One reason, however, why Lachmann's 
views shall never be popular among English Protestants is, that 
he has fully demonstrated the great inferiority of the received 
Greek text as compared with the text represented in the Latin 
vulgate. 

Finally, the Greek Testament is again submitted to critical 
revision by an English Protestant — Alford — of whose work, the 
first volume, containing the Gospels, has already appeared. 

Before concluding these observations on the different manu- 
scripts and printed editions of the scripture, we may observe 
how little the substantial integrity of the sacred text is affected 
by all the various readings which the comparison of MSS. ver- 
sions, and ancient quotations, has discovered. No doubt these 
differences of readings are very numerous. Mill produced thirty 
thousand, and the number has increased since ; but they are 
almost every one of such a character as to leave untouched the 
essential parts of any sentence — such as — the use of the singular 
for the plural, or the plural for the singular — the insertion or 
omission of the article in unimportant cases — different modes of 
spelling — different tenses of the same verb, or different cases of 
the same noun, not affecting the substantial meaning. When 
biblical criticism commenced its investigations, there were not 
wanting those who, hostile to Divine Bevelation, hoped that 
these enquiries would end in bringing into doubt and uncertainty 
the whole text of scripture, but they have been signally disap- 
pointed — and the result, so mortifying to them, is such that, to 
to use the words of the learned Cardinal Wiseman — "We must 
feel great satisfaction at the small difference between the best 
and most inferior manuscripts, and consequently at the consoling 
manner in which the integrity of the inspired records has 
been preserved." — Wiseman 1 ] s Lectures on the Connection between 
Science and Revealed Religion, second edition, p. 354. 



so 



0E THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



DISSERTATION VIII. 

OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



CHAPTER I. 

OE THE TARGTJMS, OR CHALDAIC PARAPHRASES. 

In our notice of the ancient versions of the scripture we give the 
first place to the Chaldaic paraphrases, or Tar gums as they are 
called, not because these are the most important or the most 
ancient translations of the scripture, but because they are 
written in that language, in which first of all it became necessary 
to explain the scriptures to the people, after that the Hebrew 
had ceased to be a living language. The word Tar gum is derived 
from a quadriliteral root Tar gam, and signifies interpretation or 
version : used as it is to designate the Chaldaic versions of the 
scriptures, it comes to have rather the meaning of paraphrase 
than version — the name of paraphrase being in reality better 
adapted to express the character of these translations than that 
of version. There are at present eleven or twelve such Tar gums 
extant, viz. : 

First. — The TcCrgum of Onlcelos on the Pentateuch. This is the 
most esteemed of all the Targums, both by Jews and Christians. 
It is in general so literal, that it may be well called properly a 
version. Onkelos is generally supposed to have lived some time 
before the coming of Christ. This is the testimony of the Talmud 
of Babylon, which makes him a disciple of Hillel, who died sixty 
years before the Christian era. Some, however, with Morinus 
and Eickhorn, would have it that he lived at a much later 
period ; but there is no sufficient reason for departing from the 
common opinion ; on the contrary, many things conspire to 
prove the great antiquity of the work of which we speak ; first, 
The purity of the style, which approximates closely to the 
Chaldaic of Daniel and Esdras ; second, The absence of rabbini- 
cal fables ; third, The application of certain passages to the « 
Messias, which the more modern Jews would not have so 
explained. The adversaries of the common opinion urge against 
it the silence of the fathers in regard to this work, but that 
difficulty we shall remove presently. 

Second. — The tar gum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Prophets 
— containing the books of Josue, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaias, 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



81 



Jeremias, Ezechiel, and the twelve minor prophets. According 
to the J ewish tradition, this work must have been written about 
the same time with the preceding. Jonathan is also said to have 
belonged to the school of Hillel, and to have been the most dis- 
tinguished of his eighty disciples. The style approaches a good 
deal to that of Daniel and Esdras, yet not so much as that of 
Onkelos ; sometimes foreign words are introduced, and rabbinical 
fables, and the interpretation is much less literal in the books of 
Isaias, Jeremias, Ezechiel, and the minor prophets, than in the 
other books. Eor these reasons some would have it that this 
paraphrase is the work of different interpreters, who lived as 
late as the third or fourth century of the Christian era. Yet, 
notwithstanding these reasons, the common opinion can well 
stand ; for, these foreign words may have been introduced by 
some later hand : as to the rabbinical fables, they are considered 
by good critics to be manifest interpolations — and the different 
manner of interpreting, that is, more or less literally, in different 
parts of the work may be well explained by attending to the 
nature of the subject in the different parts of the sacred text. 
The interpreter judged that the literal manner of rendering the 
text, which would convey in a sufficiently intelligible manner to 
the people the meaning of the historical books, would not be 
equally adapted to convey to them the meaning of the obscure 
prophecies which make the subject of the other books. On the 
other hand, the antiquity of the work is proclaimed by the gene- 
ral purity of the style, which, although inferior to that of Onke- 
los, is still much in advance of the later Targums which remain 
to be noticed — it is also proclaimed by the application which 
this paraphrase makes of various prophecies to the Messias, 
which the more modern Jews explain in quite a different man- 
ner. Now, as to the objection against the antiquity of these 
Targums, taken from the silence of the fathers, let us see what 
it is worth. They say that, considering the arguments which 
these Targums furnish against the Jews, it is inexplicable 
how the fathers could have passed them over in silence, par- 
ticularly Origen, St. Jerome, and St. Epiphanius, who were so 
well acquainted with the language and monuments of the Jews. 
This is merely a negative argument, and it is quite a sufficient 
answer to it to say, that the fathers, even those who understood 
the language of these books, justly considered that they were 
sufficiently supplied with arguments against the Jews to dis- 
pense them from the study of these Jewish writings, at a time 
when so many other wants of the church demanded their atten- 
tion. 

Third. — The Tar gum of Pseudo- Jonathan— & Chaldaic para- 



82 OF THE ANCIENT VEESIOXS 

phrase, thus named, because it has been falsely ascribed to the 
above-mentioned author of the Targum on the Prophets. The 
style of this paraphrase is barbarous — the work is tilled with 
rabbinical fables, and foreign words abound in it. Prom these 
characteristics, and also from certain references to places and 
persons which could only have been made by one writing at a 
comparatively late period, it is inferred, that almost the whole 
of this work cannot be of an earlier date than the eighth century, 
or the seventh at the farthest. Hence, in a critical point of view 
it is considered of little value, and the same may be said of all 
the Targums which remain to be noticed. 

Fourth. — The Jerusalem Targum on the Pentateuch has its 
name from having been made at Jerusalem, or from being writ- 
ten in the dialect of Jerusalem. It is also comparatively 
modern, and abounds in faults, such as the Pseudo-Jonathan 
exhibits. Sometimes it introduces lengthened fables, at another 
time it breaks off abruptly in the middle of a verse, leaving the 
remainder of the verse unexplained. It appears to be rather a 
collection of fragments than a regular connected work. Some 
late critics imagine that they have sufficiently discovered the 
substantial identity of this work with the Targum of Pseudo- 
Jonathan, and they, therefore, put it down that this Targum 
exhibits the fragments of a different recension or edition of that 
same work, described in the preceding paragraph, and falsely 
attributed to Jonathan. 

Filth. — A Targum on Job, Psalms, and Proverbs, attributed 
by the Jews to Joseph the Blind. This Jewish doctor is said to 
have lived in the third century of the Christian era — but the 
work appears to be much more modern, and it is, moreover, un- 
questionable that the work is the production not of one, but of 
many different authors. 

Sixth. — It is unnecessary to dwell particularly on the re- 
maining Chaldaic paraphrases that are known to be extant. 
These are, one on the live Megilloth or volumes, that is, the 
books of Ruth, Esther, the Canticle of Canticles, the Lamenta- 
tions of Jeremiah, and Ecclesiastes : one on the books of Parali- 
pomenon : three distinct paraphrases on the book of Esther, and 
a fourth on the deuterocanonical parts of that book. All these 
paraphrases, besides being filled with additions made to the text 
and childish fables, are, moreover, of so modern a date, that they 
are not considered to be of any value in the criticism of the 
sacred text. It appears from what has been said, that Targums 
have been made upon all the protocanonical books of the Old 
Testament, except Daniel, and first and second Esdras — but of 
: .ire only two which may be said to be valuable 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



83 



in a critical point of view ; that is, the Targum of Onkelos and 
that of Jonathan Een TJzziel on the prophets. These are of 
great importance to the biblical critic ; but of still greater impor- 
tance to the expounder of the sacred text : inasmuch as they 
exhibit the unbiassed interpretation by the Jewish doctors, of 
various passages regarding the Messias, before that the rejection 
of our Redeemer had induced the Jewish teachers to pervert the 
meaning of these passages. Indeed, in this exegetical point of 
view, some of the other Targums may even be occasionally of 
use, inasmuch as they sometimes adhere to the traditional under- 
standing of a passage, even though that meaning may be opposed 
to the actual prejudices of the Jewish people. In these cases, 
the Targums will at least furnish an argumentum ad liominem 
against the Jews. In these Targums, moreover, numerous pas- 
sages occur in which things are ascribed to the Word of God as 
to a distinct person — these places prove to us that, when St. 
John, in his Gospel designated the second Person of the Holy 
Trinity by the name Aoyog or "Word, his language must have 
appeared strange to the Jews or the converts from Judaism. 
We do not intend to imply, at the same time, that the 
Jews, in general, had precise notions regarding the mystery of 
the distinction of Persons in the Godhead. Isow in reference to 
the use of the term Word in a personal sense, we shall adduce 
one or two examples from the Targum of Jerusalem. First, we 
have creation attributed to the Word, in Genesis i, 27. "And 
the Word of the Lord created man : " and again, in one 
verse, Genesis iii, 22, we find ascribed to the Word, creation, 
speech, and to be the only -I eg ott en, thus — " And the Word 
of Adonai, or of the Lord, said : Behold Adam, whom I have 
created, is the only-begotten in the world, as I am the only 
begotten in the high heavens." We might quote also from 
Onkelos and Jonathan. In a word, the places are infinite in 
these paraphrases, — See Walton Prolegomenon, xii,— in which 
many things are attributed to the Word of God as to a distinct 
Person. With regard to the printed editions of these Targums, 
there is no one work which contains so many of them as 
Walton's polyglot, in which are given the Targum of Onkelos 
— the Targum, by the way, which has been oftenest printed ; 
also the Targum of Jonathan Ben TJzziel on the prophets ; the 
Targum of Pseudo- Jonathan on the Pentateuch ; and the Jeru- 
salem Targum on the Pentateuch. 



84 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



CHAPTEB IT. 

OP THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 

Under this head, we purpose to treat not only of the Samaritan 
version of the Pentateuch, which is very ancient, but also, and 
in the first place, of that Hebrew copy of the Pentateuch, 
written in the Samaritan, or ancient Hebrew character, and long 
preserved, with great veneration, by the Samaritans ; for, 
although it is with the versions of the scripture that we are now 
properly occupied, still the notice of this copy of the Pentateuch 
may be conveniently introduced here, as preliminary to the 
notice of the version of it in the Samaritan dialect, or the 
Chaldaeo- Samaritan language, as "Walton terms it. And first, in 
regard to the history of the people called Samaritans : — the 
sacred scripture informs us, that under King Roboain, the son of 
Solomon, ten tribes of Israel separated from the tribes of Juda 
and Benjamin, and constituted Jeroboam their king — thus, the 
Israelites formed two different kingdoms, that of Juda, of which 
the capital city was Jerusalem ; and that of Israel, (which name 
it retained down to the Assyrian captivity) of which Samaria — 
built by Amri, one of the successors of J eroboam — became the 
capital. We read in the 4th book of Kings, xvii, that Salman- 
asar, the King of Assyria, carried captive to Assyria the ten 
tribes, and replaced them with people from Babylon and Cutha, 
and from Avah and from Emath and Sepharvaim. In all proba- 
bility the people of Cutha were the most numerous of these 
settlers, and hence the inhabitants of the country of Samaria 
have been sometimes designated from them, Cutheans — thus 
Josephus often — although afterwards the name Samaritans 
became the fixed designation for them. We read in the same 
book of Kings — same chapter, xvii, that, after the arrival of 
these new colonists, the land of Samaria was infested with lions, 
which assailed and killed the people. Then it was represented 
to the king of Assyria that this evil had come on the people in 
consequence of their being ignorant of the manner of worshipping 
and appeasing the God of the country. Whereupon the king of 
Assyria, who, as we learn from the first book of Esdras, (iv, 3,) 
was now Assaradon, gave orders that one of the priests who had 
been brought captive to Assyria should be sent back to the coun- 
try, to teach the people the ordinances of the God of the land. 
Being instructed by this priest, they worshipped the Lord, but 
yet they forsook not the worship of their idols. — (See fourth 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



*5 



Kings, xvii.) It is thought that, even from the beginning, there 
were many Israelites dwelling among this people — these Israel- 
ites might have concealed themselves in the mountains at the 
time of the captivity ; they must have belonged, also, to the 
poorest class of the people. The Samaritans lived in this state 
under the kings of Assyria, without having much intercourse 
with the Jews. Yet we do not learn that, for a length of time, 
there were any hostilities between the two peoples. It was 
after the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity that 
that inveterate hostility commenced between the Jews and 
Samaritans, which has continued ever since. When the Jewish 
people returned with permission to build the city and temple of 
Jerusalem, the Samaritans wished to be allowed to unite with 
them in the work ; but the Jews having rej ected the proffered 
alliance, the Samaritans then endeavoured by every means in 
their power to prevent the rebuilding of the city and temple. 
The enmity which thus commenced between the two nations was 
further increased when one of the grandsons of Eliasib, the high 
priest, — {See second Esdras, xiii, 2 ,) — and whose name, we 
learn from Josephus, to have been Manasses, having been 
deprived of the priesthood because he would not send away his 
wife — a daughter of Sanaballat, the governor of Samaria, fled to 
his father-in-law, whom he induced to build for him a temple on 
Mount Garizim, near Samaria, where he offered victims in sacri- 
fice, as they were offered in Jerusalem. Thus was a temple 
raised in opposition to the temple at Jerusalem, and round this 
temple there were gathered, from time to time, many Jews, who 
followed the example of Manasses in refusing to submit to the 
ordinances of the law. Hence, after the building of this new 
temple, at least, the Samaritans of foreign origin were joined by 
many persons of Jewish extraction ; and, according to the com- 
mon opinion, they laid aside, from this same time, the worship 
of idols, to attach themselves exclusively to that of the true 
God. From this time the Samaritans have always looked upon 
Garazim as the seat of their religion, and forgetful of their pagan 
origin, (except, upon some occasions, when, by a reference to it, 
they wished to guard themselves against being involved in 
the persecutions which the Jews were suffering,) they have ever 
since wished to be considered true Israelites, who have preserved 
in all its purity the observance of the Mosaic law, and have had 
an unbroken succession of high-priests — descendants in a right 
line from Phinees, the son of Eleazar and grandson of Aaron. 
John Hyrcanus, one of the sons of the Jewish high-priest 
Simon, demolished the temple of Garizim, about one hundred 
and thirty years before the Christian era, and two hundred 



86 



0"F THE AXCIEXT VERSIONS 



after it had been built by Sanaballat. The Samaritans, however, 
still continued to inhabit the country about Sichem : and even 
to this day a remnant of them, consisting of about thirty 
families, continues to dwell in that city, which is now called 
Naplouse. From various inquiries made regarding these people 
by late writers, and from the accounts of travellers, who have 
visited them, we learn that, although reduced to so small a 
number, yet they contract no marriage with a stranger — -they 
believe, as in the time of Christ, that it is upon Mount Grarizim 
that God wishes to be adored — they celebrate the pasch at the 
site of their ancient temple upon that Mount — they practise cir- 
cumcision, observe the Sabbath and the other festivals prescribed 
by the law of Moses ; of which law they are even more super- 
stitious observers than the Jews themselves ; nor do the Jews 
surpass them in their horror of idolatry. They expect a 
Messias, whom they call Ratliab. They have faithfully pre- 
served the Pentateuch— the only part of the scripture which 
they receive. 

Having thus briefly noticed the origin and history of the 
Samaritans, we come now to say a few words on that copy of the 
Pentateuch which has been long preserved among them, written 
in the ancient Hebrew character. The ancients were well 
acquainted with this Samaritan copy. It is cited by Eusebius, 
St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Jerome, &c. Afterwards, for many 
centuries, it was neglected by biblical students, insomuch that 
its very existence began to be questioned. In later times, when 
the attention of the learned began to be turned to the matter, 
Usher was fortunate enough to procure no less than six copies of 
it from the East. It was, however, from a copy purchased by 
Pietro della Yalle, at Damascus, and presented by him to the 
French ambassador at Constantinople, who was afterwards 
bishop of St. Maloes, that the Samaritan Pentateuch was first 
printed by Morinus, in the Paris polyglot ; and this was the 
copy printed afterwards by Walton, after being collated with 
three of Usher's MSS. — Moralia Introcluctio ad S. Scripturam, 
torn. 1, p. 33. Yarious have been the opinions of critics regard- 
ing the time at which the Samaritans became possessed of this 
copy — among these opinions, however, there are but tbree 
deserving of consideration. Eirst, Some suppose that the Sama- 
ritans became acquainted with the Pentateuch only after the 
return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, at the time 
when Manasses the son-in-law of Sanaballat, went over to 
them. The defenders of this opinion say that, at this time, the 
Pentateuch was introduced among the Samaritans by this Jewish 
priest, that they might become acquainted with the Mosaic pre- 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



87 



cepts and ceremonial, which were in future to be observed by 
them. Second, A second opinion is, that when the Cutheans and 
the other strangers had been sent to take possession of the land 
of Samaria, they found this copy of the Pentateuch in the hands 
of that remnant of the ten tribes which had escaped the cap- 
tivity by taking refuge in the mountains. Third, The third 
opinion, in tine, is that which says, that the priest who was sent 
by Assaradon to teach the Samaritans the manner of worship- 
ping the God of Israel, brought with him, for that purpose, this 
copy of the Pentateuch. The first of these opinions is by no 
means probable ; for if the Samaritans had then, for the first 
time, received the Pentateuch, when their temple was built on 
ATount Garizim, there is no sufficient reason why, in receiving 
the books of the Jews,, they would have restricted themselves to 
the Pentateuch : moreover, the great hatred which the Samari- 
tans then entertained for the Jews would have been an effectual 
bar to their receiving any of their books. The arguments ad- 
duced in support of this opinion, by a modern German critic— 
Gesenius — are too weak to withstand these objections against it. 
Hengstenberg, also, in his " Dissertations on the Genuineness of 
the Pentateuch," in the first section of his work, endeavours to 
overthrow the arguments in favour of the great antiquity of the 
Samaritan Pentateuch, and to show that the Samaritans might 
have received from the Jews the Pentateuch — and the Pentateuch 
only — at a comparatively late period in the Jewish history ; that 
is to say, between the return of the Jews from the captivity and 
the time of Christ — the time of Manasses the priest, he appears 
to suppose probable enough. But he is not successful in his 
reasoning, for it still remains firm, that this book, the ritual of 
the Jewish worship, was, at the time mentioned in the 4th book 
of Kings, xvii, made known to the strangers from the Assyrian 
empire, who settled in the country from which the ten tribes 
had been removed. All things harmonize in this view of the 
matter — the necessity under which the people conceived them- 
selves to be, of learning the worship of the God of Israel, made 
them solicitous to procure that book which formed the ritual of 
that worship —and the Pentateuch being alone sufficient for their 
purpose, they had no wish to extend their acquaintance with the 
Hebrew books, to Josue or Judges. Por we see, that they con- 
tinued for a long time after the period mentioned in the 4th 
book of Kings, xvii, attached to their idols ; and hence, we may 
well infer, that they were not disposed to receive the religion of 
the Hebrews beyond what the necessity of the case appeared to 
them to demand. In the course of time, the manner in which 
their advances towards the Jews were repulsed by the latter 



88 



OP THE AKCIEITT VERSIONS 



people, would disincline them to receive any other of the Hebrew 
books. 

Of the other two opinions, that which attributes the intro- 
duction of the book to the priest sent by Assaraclon, appears far 
the more probable ; for, the remnant of the ten tribes, which had 
escaped the captivity, belonged to the poorest class of the people ; 
and if we suppose even that these had brought with them to 
their places of refuge, copies of the books of Moses, it is not yet 
likely that they would have soon ventured to go among the new 
settlers, nor even if they had, would the authority of such 
wretched people have been much regarded by the latter. We 
see then how the Samaritans became possessed of the Pentateuch, 
and we see at the same time, without noticing further the 
reasons which are alleged for this, why they receive only the 
books of the law of Moses — in these they had the ritual of the 
Mosaic worship, and it was this, and only this, which they 
sought. 

jS"ow, as to the integrity and critical character of this 
Hebrew- Samaritan Pentateuch. In the first place, the substan- 
tial agreement, in almost every place, between it and that 
Hebrew Pentateuch which has come down to us from the 
Jewish church, affords an illustrious confirmation of the authen- 
ticity and integrity of the Mosaic records ; seeing that these 
books have been so long in the hands of two different nations, 
between whom such continual enmities have existed, as render 
it impossible to imagine, that this agreement could be the result 
of any collusion between them. On the other hand, there are 
various discrepancies between them, but generally in things of 
little importance, and such as might happen from the mistakes of 
copyists. "We cannot, however, exempt the Samaritans from 
the charge of wilfully corrupting that passage of Deuteronomy, 
xxii, 4 — where they have substituted Mount Garizim for Mount 
Hebal ; no doubt, for the purpose of sanctioning that leading 
doctrine of theirs — that Garizim was the appointed place for the 
solemn worship of God. From whatever cause these discrepancies 
in the Samaritan Pentateuch have proceeded, it is now admitted 
by critics, that this Pentateuch has not been corrupted by a cer- 
tain Dositheus, who taught, in the time of the apostles, most 
impious doctrines, and procured some followers among the 
Samaritans, called after him Dositheans— See Moralia, place 
already cited. Seeing, however, the great agreement between 
the two Pentateuchs, which is indisputable, it remains to inquire 
what is the critical value of the Hebrew-Samaritan copy — can 
it be placed on a level with the copies of the Pentateuch which 
have come down to us from the Jewish church ; and if not, how 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



89 



far can it be applied as a source of emendation of the text of the 
latter? Some there are who would give a preference even to 
this Samaritan Pentateuch over the Hebrew- Jewish, such as 
Morinus, Cappel, Yossius ; but the judgment of these writers 
will not be assented to by any modern critic. The a priori 
argument, which might be deduced in favour of the Jewish 
copies from the words of St. Paul, in his epistle to the Romans, 
iii, 2, " The words of God were committed to them," (ra Xoyia 
tov foov,) has been abundantly confirmed by the minute in- 
vestigations of recent critics. For ourselves, then, we agree 
with those who give the preference to the Jewish copies. In 
regard to the critical use of this Samaritan Pentateuch, this 
much, at the least, must be admitted, that when this Pentateuch 
agrees with our Hebrew text, in those places in which rash 
critics have questioned the purity of that Hebrew text, such 
agreement supplies a strong argument in favour of the fidelity 
of the text which they impugn. Of what further value, in the 
criticism of the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch, this Samaritan 
copy may be, we leave others to determine. 

A word or two now on the Samaritan version of the Penta- 
teuch, which must be cautiously distinguished from that Hebrew- 
Samaritan copy, of which we have been treating hitherto. The 
intercourse between the new settlers in the land of Samaria, and 
the remnant of the ten tribes, which had escaped the captivity, 
gave rise to a new dialect, which was a mixture of Hebrew and 
Chaldaic — this is that Samaritan language or dialect, in which 
this version of the Pentateuch is written ; it not only differs from 
the ancient Hebrew, but also from that dialect which the Jews 
spoke after their return from the captivity. The characters, 
however, used in writing this new dialect, are no other than the 
ancient Hebrew characters, in which, consequently, we find 
written, as well the Hebrew-Samaritan "copy of the Pentateuch 
as its Samaritan version. At what precise time this Samaritan 
version was made cannot be determined. No doubt, from the 
first arrival of the priest sent by Assaradon, according to the 
directions given to him, it was necessary to explain to the 
Cutheans, and the other strangers by whom the land of Samaria 
was possessed, the prescribed manner of worshipping the Lord, 
and that in a language different from the Hebrew, in which alone 
the Pentateuch was then written. But since, as we have observed, 
the Samaritan dialect in which this version is written, is mani- 
festly one that has sprung up from the intercourse between the 
new colonists and the remnant of the ancient inhabitants of the 
country, and since it is only after a considerable lapse of time 
that such a mixture could have assumed the regular form of a 



90 



OF THE ANCIENT VEESIOVS 



language, hence, we are not at liberty to elate the origin of this 
version so far back as the time of the arrival of the priest who 
was sent by the king of Assyria. It is very probable, that this 
version was made after the return of the jews from captivity, 
and at the same time at which the temple was built on llount 
Garizim — then did the Samaritans, in all probability, discard all 
idolatry ; then did they become anxious to rival the Jews in the 
knowledge and practice of the law. In the greater part of this 
very ancient version, we have the Hebrew- Samaritan text 
rendered very literally ; in those places also, in which this text 
differs from the Hebrew- Jewish. However, there are various 
places in which the translator has taken an unwarrantable liberty 
in departing from the letter of his text ; sometimes, in conse- 
quence of such laxity, giving a meaning to passages quite irre- 
concilable with the text. At the same time, this discrepancy, as 
AToralia observes — Introductio in Scripturam Sacram, torn. 1, p. 
58 — does not prove that the version was not made from the 
Hebrew- Samaritan text ; since on the one hand, in all other 
places, this text is literally followed ; and on the other, these 
differences in some places, to which we have referred, may have 
proceeded either from the translator having used a vitiated copy, 
or his having permitted himself sometimes to be influenced by 
his prejudices; or finally, his not having penetrated, in some 
instances, the m'eaning of his text. This Samaritan version is 
printed in the polyglots of Paris and London. There is, more- 
over, an Arabic version of the Samaritan Pentateuch extant in 
Samaritan characters, but we shall not delay to treat of it ; it is 
not more ancient than the year of our Lord 1070. 



CHAPTER III. 

OF THE SEPTEAGTXT VERSIOX. 

The Septuagint version, if not the most ancient of all the versions 
of Scripture, which is highly probable, is at least the earliest of 
all the Greek versions, having been made a considerable time 
before the coming of our Redeemer. In ail probability, it dates 
as far back as two-hundred-and-eighty years before that event. 
The name Septuagint, which this version bears, has been generally 
accounted for by the fact of its having been made by seventy 
translators, or rather seventy-two ; but the round number is used. 
(It is often designated by the Greek letter o.) This version is 
remarkable for many reasons — it was quoted by the Redeemer 
and the apostles ; used in the church commonly for at least the 



OF TITE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



91 



first four centuries ; for, from it was made the ancient Latin 
version used in the western church before the time of St. Jerome's 
version. It was held in great repute for a long time among the 
Jews, and read in their synagogues. It is it which the great 
body of the fathers have quoted in their writings. It is stili the 
version used in the Greek church, and a portion of our Latin 
vulgate is a translation from it. We shall inquire into the origin 
of the version, and its consequent history — and first, respecting 
its origin : — 

The ancient writers generally quoted on this subject, are 
Aristeas, Aristobulus, Josephus, Philo, St. Justin Martyr, and St. 
Epiphanius, in his work Be Ponderibus et Mensuris. "We have 
"a history of the Septuagint version ascribed to Aristeas, in which 
he gives the following account of the matter : — When Demetrius 
Phalereus was librarian to King Ptolemy Philadelphus, at Alexan- 
dria, and had collected a great many books for the library there, 
he was asked on one occasion by the king how many books he 
had then collected, he replied that the whole number at that 
time amounted to two hundred thousand, and that he hoped that 
the number would be further increased to five hundred thousand : 
he at the same time added, that the laws of the Jews were very 
deserving of a place in it, but that they should be first translated 
from the Hebrew. The king then promised to have letters sent 
to the high priest of the Jews at Jerusalem, with a view to pro- 
cure for his library a copy of these laws translated into Gfreek. 
Aristeas, the writer of this history, who was favourable to the 
Jews, and is supposed to have been himself a Jewish proselyte, 
happened to be present. This Aristeas was a prefect in the 
king's body-guard, and on hearing mention made of the Jews, he 
thought of the idea which he, in common with Sosibius and 
Andrew — two other prefects of the king's guards — entertained, 
of procuring the liberation of the Jews, who were numerous in 
Egypt, having been brought captive thither from the Syrian 
and Phoenician wars by Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, father of 
Ptolemy Philadelphus. This occasion, then, presenting itself, 
these three officers said to the king, that it would be worthy of 
Lis clemency, and altogether a very congruous thing, that, as he 
expected this favour of the Jews, he would, on his part, liberate 
those of their nation who were held captive in his dominions, 
especially as this would induce the Jews to comply the more 
willingly with his request. The king then inquired what was 
the number of these captive Jews, and being informed that they 
amounted to one hundred thousand, he promised that he would 
have them liberated. He then ordered twenty drachmas to be 
given to each of them, that he might thus have the means of 



92 



07 THE ATrCTEBTT VERSIONS 



compensating his master for the loss of his services ; in this way 
he expended beyond six hundred talents, and then by a royal 
edict, declared the Jews to be free. He now gave letters, ad- 
dressed to the high priest Eleazar, requesting of him to send the 
sacred book, and along with it. men who were able to make a 
translation of it into Greek. Aristeas and Andrew made a part 
of the embassy to the high priest, which brought suitable presents 
from the king. Eleazar sent the books of the law. together with 
seventy-two interpreters — six from each tribe — qualified for the 
office of translating them ; and at the same time he sent letters, 
in which he extolled the liberality and clemency of the king. 

These Jews were kindly received by Philadelphus. who. on 
their introduction, to testify his veneration for the sacred books, 
made a profound adoration seven times. He praised very much 
the elegance of the manuscript, which was written in golden 
letters. He then gave a grand entertainment to the seventy- 
two, and was so much delighted with the answers given by nine 
of them to questions proposed by him. that he prolonged the 
festivity for seven days more, until all were heard, in reply to 
as many questions as there were translators. Soon after, Deme- 
trius Phalereus conducted them to the island of Pharos, where a 
house was fitted up for them to the north of the island, on the 
sea-shore, where they were to translate the sacred books. They 
divided the labour among them, and it was determined that if 
any difficulty should occur, they would all discuss it altogether. 
As the translation of each part was finally settled and committed 
to writing, it was handed to Demetrius, who had it transcribed 
by amanuenses. The translators were employed in the work 
each clay from morning to the ninth hour, or three hours before 
sunset ; then they returned to the city (Alexandria), where they 
were abundantly supplied with all necessaries. In the morning, 
they resumed their labours, having first washed their hands and 
recited their prayers, according to custom. In the space of 
seventy-two days the version was finished. The work being 
concluded, was read in an assembly of the Jews of Alexandria, 
and approved of. Such is the substance of the famous book of 
Aristeas, which abounds in various details, which we pass over, 
such as the description of the presents sent by the king to the 
high priest, the description of the things which the author wit- 
nessed at Jerusalem connected with the temple and its worship, 
the statement of the various questions proposed by the king to 
the seventy-two interpreters, on the successive days of the fes- 
tivity, together with their answers. &c, &c. 

Aristobulus was a Jew, who lived about two hundred years 
before Christ. Both Clement of Alexandria, and Eusebius, speak 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTTRES. 



93 



of him. His account of the origin of this translation is very 
brief, as it has come down to us. It is given by Eusebius in his 
Prceparatio Evangelica. This account simply informs us, that 
' ' the entire interpretation of the law was made in the time of a 
kin"-, surnamed Philadelphus, Demetrius Phalereus having been 
actively employed about it." As for Josephus, he gives us 
Aristeas' own history of the matter in the twelfth book and 
second chapter of his Antiquities. 

Philo, in his Life of Moses, speaks of this Septuagint version 
as made by men divinely inspired ; he says nothing, however, 
about Aristeas or Demetrius Phalereus. 

St. Justin Martyr, in his Exhortation to the Greeks, relates 
the matter differently from Aristeas : he says, that Ptolemy, 
Kin°" of Egypt, wishing to have a translation of the Jewish law, 
procured from Jerusalem seventy translators, whom he sent into 
the isle of Pharos, and had confined in separate cells, in order to 
prove their fidelity in the work, by the agreement which would 
be found to exist among the distinct translations. He adds, that 
it so happened, by the Divine Providence, that they not only all 
agreed in substance, but in the very words and number of the 
letters. He, moreover, adds, that he saw himself the remains 
of the cells in the isle of Pharos. 

St. Epiphanius relates, on the authority of some ancient writer, 
that the translators were shut up in thirty- six cells— that is, two 
in each cell — and that they thus produced thirty-six versions 
agreeing most uniformly together. JNow, what is to be thought 
of these different accounts ? Eirst, we shall not delay on the 
accounts given by Justin Martyr and St. Epiphanius, who, in this 
case, have merely repeated histories, resting on no sufficient foun- 
dation. We come then to examine the account given by Aristeas, 
and repeated by Josephus. We may say, that from the earliest 
times of the Christian church down to a comparatively late 
period, scarcely has a doubt been hinted at relative to the au- 
thenticity of Aristeas' book. The genuinenesss of the book was 
called inquestion by Lewis Vives, a learned Spaniard, who wrote 
about the middle of the sixteenth century— (See Moralia In- 
troduc. in Sacram Scripturam, torn. 1, cap. 5, p. 59, et seq.)— 
and since his time many critics, principally Protestant, have 
altogether rejected this narrative of the origin of the Septuagint 
version. No doubt, it has had many defenders, even in these 
recent times : among others, Walton has distinguished himself 
as an advocate of the book in his prolegomena to the polyglot ; 
but since the appearance of Humphrey Hody's dissertation on 
the matter, we may say that the book has been universally 
abandoned by Protestant critics. Still, there have not been 



94 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



wanting Catholic writers to defend the ancient opinion, and to 
show, that the arguments of Hody, specious though they be, 
are by no means conclusive. Among others, Thomas ALoralia— 
Introtfuctio ad Sacrum Scripturam, loco jam citato. And even 
those Catholic critics, who have yielded so far to the objections 
urged against this narrative as to treat as fabulous various cir- 
cumstances of it, are yet far from rejecting the substance of the 
historical fact which the book contains ; and without dwelling 
further on the other part of the controversy, we shall insist on 
so much at least, viz., that the substance of the fact related in 
this book ascribed to Aristeas, must be admitted. For, in reality, 
not to go into further details on the matter, the substance of the 
fact is contained in those words of Aristobulus, which we have 
already quoted from Eusebius, that, "the entire interpretation 
of the law was made in the time of a king, surnamed Phila- 
delphus, Demetrius Phalereus having been actively employed 
about it." Xow, this testimony of Aristobulus is not questioned 
by the best critics, and Protestant writers themselves will bear 
us out in this assertion — Inter alios Davidson — Biblical Criticism, 
Lecture iii. That difficulty, which is urged against the book of 
Aristeas — that it makes Demetrius Phalereus librarian to Phila- 
delphus, and a favourite with that king, contrary to the fact, and 
to what might be expected, from the circumstance that Phila- 
delphus was aware that Demetrius had advised Ptolemy Lagi 
not to leave the kingdom to him (Philadelphus) — that difficulty, 
I sav, whatever may be replied to it by the defenders of Aristeas 7 
narrative, does not come against this account of Aristobulus ; 
for all that his words convey is, that the translation was first set 
on foot by Demetrius, and finished under Ptolemy Philadelphus. 
So that his words would consist well with the opinion that it 
was with Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, and not Ptolemy Phila- 
delphus, that the idea originated of procuring a translation of 
the Jewish laws. Those who contend for this meaning of 
Aristobulus' words say, that it can be confirmed from other 
sources ; for Plutarch relates, that Demetrius advised Ptolemy 
Lagi to purchase and read books relating to royalty and dominion ; 
and iElian informs us, that he (Demetrius) took an active part 
in the laws introduced by Ptolemy. It is also certain that this 
king was favourably disposed towards the Jews. Seeing then 
that the testimony of Aristobulus regarding the origin of the 
Septuagint version stands firm, we are to ascribe the existence of 
this translation to a literary motive, or rather a political one, on 
the part of Demetrius Phalereus, whose object in advising the 
king to procure a copy of the Jewish laws was, that he might 
thence learn how to govern and regulate a state in the best manner. 



OF THE SACKED SCRirTTTRES. 



95 



Now, as to the name Septuagint, by which this translation is 
known, it becomes a matter of doubt with those who put no 
trust in the detailed narrative of Aristeas, whether there were 
actually seventy or seventy-two persons engaged in this translation. 
Some there are who consider that the name rather originated 
in the fact that this translation was formally approved of by the 
Jewish council, or Sanhedrin, at Alexandria, which consisted of 
seventy-two (in round numbers seventy) persons. If we admit 
that this translation was made by J ews of Alexandria, then it is 
most probable that it was executed by members of the Jewish 
council in that city. In truth, if the king did not apply to 
Jerusalem for translators, it appears to follow, as a matter of 
course, that it was to the Sanhedrin of Alexandria that he had 
his wishes conveyed on a matter which the Jews would consider 
so important ; and then, this body undertaking the translation, 
superintending its execution, having it executed in all proba- 
bility by its own members, and approving of it when finished, 
might, with great propriety, be called the translators. "We will - 
thus see how the whole version could be said to have proceeded 
from the same seventy, or seventy-two, translators, at the same 
time that different parts of the version were made by different 
persons. 

We have next to inquire, whether the seventy translated the 
Pentateuch only, or, at the same time, the other books, which 
then having been put on the canon, were not found in Greek. 
St. Jerome says (on Ezechiel v,) "that Aristeas, Josephus, and 
all the school of the Jews assert, that the seventy translated 
only the five books of Moses." He appears himself to have been 
in doubt on the subject. The other opinion, appears to us to be 
much better supported, which says, that they translated all 
which required translation. The manner of speaking of the 
fathers, and ancient writers of the church generally, appears to 
be decidedly in favour of this opinion. It is sustained by the 
testimony of Aristobulus. Bonlrerius considers this opinion bv 
far the more probable ; and Bellarmine looks upon it as, at least, 
more probable. And, in reality, there is no reason, why Ptolemy 
would not have wished for, and procured a version of the other 
books, as well as of those of Moses. As to the objection against 
this opinion, taken from the different manner of translating in 
different books, we have disposed of that already, by observing, 
that although the whole translation may be properly ascribed to 
the same seventy, or seventy-two, yet that different parts of it 
proceeded from different persons. We may observe, moreover 
that as to anything in this version which would indicate that 
different parts of it were made at different times, all the len« tii 



96 



OF THE AXCIENT VERSIONS 



of time that would be required from the beginning to the finish- 
ing of the translation in order to explain this, will be sufficiently 
had by saying, that the version was commenced under Ptolemy 
Lagi and finished under Ptolemy Philadelphus. Thus, for 
example, the word youaoc, used in the book of Josue to signify 
a javelin, could not have been used by an Egyptian translator in 
the time of Ptolemy, son of Lagus, because the word was then 
unknown in Egypt, it having become known there first, as desig- 
nating a javelin used by the Gauls in their wars : now, the 
Gauls first made an irruption into Egypt in the time of Phila- 
delphus. 

Another question regarding this version is, whether the 
translators were divinely assisted in making it. The affirmative 
appears to have been commonly, if not universally held by the 
ancient fathers and writers of the church, as it was also by Philo, 
in his Life of Moses. Bellarmine claims St. Jerome also for this 
opinion. Yet all Catholics even do not now adhere to it. 
Glaire has an express proposition, asserting the opposite as more 
probable. — Introduction, torn. 1, p. 204. Certainly, as far as 
this opinion is supposed to have been founded on the narrative 
of St. Justin Hartyr, or that of St. Epiphanius, regarding the 
miraculous agreement between those who were confined in dis- 
tinct cells— if we take away the foundation with St. Jerome in 
his preface to the Pentateuch, it would appear that the super- 
structure could not stand. On the other hand, if we consider 
the important ends which this version, in the designs of God, was 
destined to fulfil, we ought not to be surprised at finding it so 
easily admitted, that God, who had inspired the writers of his 
sacred word, had also inspired the interpreters of it on this grand 
occasion ; for, these interpreters were, in reality, preparing the 
scripture for its publication among the gentiles, in the language 
which the gentiles understood ; seeing, that when in after times 
the apostles were spreading the faith among the nations, these 
were the scriptures which they quoted, and to which they 
referred : and what the Hebrew scriptures were for the Jews, 
did this Septuagint version become for the church, which for 
centuries read the divine word in it, or in versions made from it. 

We shall come now to the subsequent history of this version. 
So great was the esteem in which the Egyptian and Grecian 
Jews held this version at first, that according to Philo (in the 
second hook of his Life of Moses,) they repaired yearly to the 
island of Pharos, and kept a festival on the shore in memory of 
this inspired translation. It is manifest, indeed, from the man- 
ner in which the Redeemer and apostles quote the Septuagint, 
that the veneration for it was not confined to the Hellenistic 



OF THE SACKED SCRIPTURES. 



97 



Jews. Bat we find, that about the commencement of the second 
century, and subsequently, it became very odious to the Jews, on 
account of their not being able to answer the arguments brought 
from it by the Christians, in their disputes with them. The 
Jews on these occasions used to appeal to the Hebrew text, with 
which they knew that the Christians generally were unac- 
quainted : and it is said, that this translation became so odious 
to them, that they proclaimed a fast on the 8th day of the month 
of Thebet — corresponding to our December — in order to perpetu- 
ate the remembrance of so inauspicious an event as the making 
of this version, by this annual mourning. 

With the Hellenist Jews, however, this version continued to 
be an object of veneration down to a much later period than the 
second century. These Hellenist Jews are mentioned more than 
once in the Acts of the Apostles — one instance is in Acts, vi, 1 , 
where the word, which we translate Greeks, is in the original 
EWyv/orajv, meaning Christians, who had been — not Grecians — 
but Hellenist, or Grecizing Jews. Another instance is in ix, 29, 
where we read, that St. Paul disputed against the Hellenists 
(here we again translate Greeks,) who are there distinguished 
from the gentiles, and therefore must mean the unconverted 
Grecizing Jews, or Hellenists. It would appear, that this name 
was first given to one section of the Jews, after the formation of 
this Septuagint version ; because at Alexandria and the other 
Grecian cities, where the Jews became dispersed, they learned 
the scripture in the synagogues from this version, therefore 
were they called Hellenists, to distinguish them from the Jews 
who read the scriptures in the synagogue in Hebrew, and had 
them explained for them in Syro-Chaldaic (which was also com- 
monly called Hebrew,) and hence were called, in contradistinc- 
tion, Hebrew Jews or Hebrews. The Hellenist Jews adhered 
to their veneration for the Seventy, down at least, to the middle 
of the sixth century of our era : for, about the year 550, in the 
time of the Emperor Justinian, we find that the Hellenists gave 
great offence to the other Jews, by continuing to use the Septua- 
gint in their synagogues. So great was the excitement on this 
matter among the Jews, that the dispute was only settled by a 
constitution of the emperor, which is extant, (Novel. 146,) and 
in which he decides in favour of the Hellenists, declaring that 
they shall have full liberty to continue the use of their version 
in the synagogue. 

This, as has been already observed, was the great version 
in which the early Christian church, generally a»t least, read the 
scriptures. At the same time, it did not continue to be the 
same perfect translation which it was when leaving the hands 

H 



98 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



of the translators. St. Jerome testifies, in his* preface to Para- 
lipomenon and Esdras, that it had been vitiated in many and 
various ways : so faulty, indeed, did it become in the book of 
Daniel, that it was set aside there, and that book was read from 
the version of Theodotion. Various persons undertook the task 
of correcting the mistakes which had crept into the Seventy; 
but before all others, Origen deserves to be mentioned, for his 
wonderful labours in this matter. In the early part of the 
third century, he undertook the laborious task of collating the 
Septuagint text then in use with the original, and with the 
other Greek translations then in existence, and from the whole 
to produce a new revisal. Twenty-eight years were devoted to 
the preparation of this arduous work, in the course of which he 
collected MSS. from every possible quarter. He commenced his 
labour at Caesarea, in 231, and, it appears, finished the under- 
taking at Tyre, but in what year is not precisely known. This 
work of Origen s is designated, in ancient writers, by the various 
names of Tetrapla, Hexapla, Octapla, and Enneapla : Origen 
used for it six Greek versions, which we shall notice more at 
length in the next chapter, but which we must briefly refer to 
here. First, that of Aquila, who was first a gentile, and then 
a Christian. Having been excommunicated he became a Jew, 
and translated the Old Testament into Greek, about the year 
150. Second, that of Theodotion, a Jewish proselyte from hav- 
ing been a Marcionite heretic. He made his translation about 
the year 155. Third, that of S)mmachus, who became a Jew, 
from having been either a Samaritan or an Ebionite heretic. 
He translated about the year 200. The remaining three ver- 
sions are called the fifth, sixth, and seventh, in reference to the 
other four Greek versions, viz. the Septuagint, and those just 
now mentioned of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus. These 
three versions, i. e. the fifth, sixth, and seventh, did not contain 
the entire of the Old Testament, but some books only. Origen 
seems to have first published his Tetrapla, containing in four 
columns the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, the Seventy, and 
Theodotion. This was merely preparatory to his projected cor- 
rection of the Seventy, for in a more enlarged edition he added 
the Hebrew text, both in Hebrew and Greek letters ; and as the 
work then consisted of six columns, he gave it the name Hexa- 
pla. The name Octapla comes from the addition of two of the 
remaining Greek versions — Enneapla from the addition of the 
three, i. e. the fifth, sixth, and seventh. The following is the 
order of the columns when all the versions were used : — Eirst, 
the Hebrew text, in Hebrew letters. Second, the same in Greek 
letters. Third, Aquila. Eourth, Symmachus. Fifth, Septua- 



OF THE SACKED SCRIPTURES. 



99 



gint. Sixth, Theodotion. Seventh, eighth, and ninth, the 
three anonymous Greek versions, viz. those called the fifth, 
sixth, and seventh versions. These three last-mentioned ver- 
sions contained only some hooks of the scripture, as we have 
already observed. The seventh version was used in the Psalms 
only ; and Hexapla appears to have been the name by which the 
work was generally designated. Origen's plan of proceeding, in 
giving an edition of the Seventy, was not to alter the existing 
text of the version, by erasing a word or words — he left it as he 
found it. But he conducted the work in this way : when he 
discovered a word in Hebrew, which was not in the Septuagint, 
he inserted it out of Theodotion, because in his mode of trans- 
lating he came nearest the Seventy. If Theodotion had not the 
supplement, he took it from Aquila, and sometimes from 
Symmachus. In every case he put the name of the translation, 
from which the supplied word or words were taken, with an 
asterisk (*) at the commencement, and two dots at the end like 
a colon (:), to show how far the supplement extended. Again, 
where he perceived an addition in the Seventy, of something not 
found in the original, nor, perhaps, in the other translations, he 
did not entirely erase it from the Septuagint, but prefixed an 
obelus (— ) to denote that it was wanting in the original text, 
putting also two dots at the end, to show how much was referred 
to by the obelus. He used also two other marks, called the 
lemniscus and hypolemniscus, the signification of which is not 
now clear. The work, consisting of nearly fifty volumes, does 
not appear to ha\ e been copied, on account of the expense which 
would have been required for that purpose. It lay buried for 
nearly fifty years in Tyre, until Eusebius, and Pamphilus the 
martyr, brought it to Csesarea, where it is thought to have per- 
ished along with the famous library of Pamphilus, when 
Csesarea was taken and plundered by the Saracens in 653. 
Origen's recension of the Seventy is called the Hexaplarian 
text, to distinguish it from the text, as it existed before, called 
the xoivri or common, and sometimes the ante-Hexaplarian. 
About the year 300, Eusebius and Pamphilus gave an edition 
of the Seventy from the Hexaplar text, with the whole of 
Origen's critical marks. It was not only adopted by the 
churches of Palestine, but was also deposited in almost every 
library. By the frequent transcribing of it, Origen's notes, or 
marks, became soon so much changed as to be of little use, and 
were finally omitted. In the time of St. Jerome, we find that 
it was impossible to distinguish Origen's corrections from what 
belonged to the translators. About the same time with the 
edition by Eusebius and Pamphilus, appeared the edition of 



ICO 



OF THE AXCTEXT VERSIONS 



Lucian, a priest of Antioeh, who suffered martyrdom in 311. 
He gave an edition of the xo/v?j which was received in all the 
Eastern churches from Constantinople to Antioch. Hesychius, 
an Egyptian bishop, about the same time, gave another edition 
of the Seventy ; according to St, Jerome, it was generally used 
in the churches of Egypt. All the MSS. of the Septuagint ver- 
sion now known to exist, as well as all the printed editions of it, 
have been derived from these three recensions. It is at the same 
time a matter of dispute among critics, to what particular recen- 
sion each manuscript belongs. The most ancient, as well as the 
most famous MSS. of the Septuagint now known, are those two 
already mentioned when we were treating of the MSS. of the 
New Testament : — the Eoman manuscript, preserved in the 
Yatican library, and the Codex Alexandrinus, preserved in the 
library of the British Museum. Both are supposed to belong to 
the fourth or fifth century. Alban Butler, in a note on the life 
of St. Lucian, {Lives of the Saints^ 7th January,) says, "that 
the Vatican manuscript is proved from St. Jerome's letter to 
Junia and Eretela, and from several instances, to come nearest 
to the xoivTi and to Lucian' s edition, as Grabe, Blanchini, and 
Kennicott, take notice." Of the Alexandrian MS. the same 
Alban Butler observes in the same place, "that it comes nearest 
to Origen's edition in the Hexapla, as Grabe, Montfaucon, and 
Kennicott, agree that in some places it is conformable to Theo- 
dotion or Symmachus, and appears mostly the Hesychian 
edition." Now, Lucian' s edition was the purest : this St. 
Jerome affirms. — Ep. ad Suniam et Fretel. torn. 2, col. 627. 
And according to Kennicott (Disserta. 2, p. 397,) it is generally 
admitted bv modern critics. This preference given by modern 
critics to the recension of St. Lucian, appears, moreover, from 
the great popularity of the Yatican text, as compared with the 
other leading printed texts of the Septuagint. These leading 
printed texts, are altogether four : the Complutensian, the 
Aldine, the B,oman or Yatican, and the Alexandrian. The Com- 
plutensian is the text printed in the Complutensian polyglot, 
which work bears date 1514, 1517, although not actually pub- 
lished before the year 1522. This text was printed after several 
MSS., but of these the editors have left us no account. The Aldine 
text is that which appeared from the press of Aldus Manutius, 
in Yenice, 1518. It is named after that celebrated printer, 
although it did not appear until two years after his death. 
This text was compiled from numerous ancient MSS. It has 
been supposed in some instances to follow the readings of 
Aquiia's version, instead of those of the Septuagint. 

I'he Bonian, or Yatican, text, was printed at Home, in folio, 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



101 



under Pope Sixtus Quint us : some copies of it bear the date o^ 
1586 ; others, and those the more numerous, that of 1587. 
Cardinal Antony Carafa, who was commissioned by the Pope to 
publish this edition, called to his aid various learned men, 
whose names may be seen in Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra. — 
Biblia Grmca Impressa. anno 1587. Prefixed to the work is a 
dedicatory epistle of Carafa to Pope Sixtus Y. It has also a 
Latin preface by Peter Morinus, and scholia appended to each 
chapter, selected by the same Morinus from the ancient Greek 
interpreters, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. From the 
statements of Cardinal Carafa and Morinus, quoted by Le Long, 
it appears manifest that the collation of numerous MSS. con- 
firmed the editors in tfee high opinion which they entertained of 
the Codex Yaticanus ; so that we may infer not only that this 
was made the basis of their text, but even the exemplar of it. 
It appears that those parts which were wanting in the Vatican 
Codex, were supplied by the editors from a Venetian MS. out 
of Cardinal Bessarion's library, and from another, which was 
brought to them from Calabria. The text of this Roman edition 
has been generally followed by subsequent editors of the Septua- 
gint. 

The Alexandrian printed text, appeared from the Oxford 
press 17 07-1720, in four volumes, folio ; and eight volumes, 
octavo. The whole work was prepared for the press by Grabe, 
although he did not live to see the entire of it printed. The 
first volume has prefixed to it the learned prolegomena of Grabe. 
The edition generally follows the Alexandrian manuscript, 
wherever that was perfect ; but where it was defective and in- 
correct, the supplied passages and corrected readings are given, 
partly from the Vatican MS. and partly from the Complutensian 
edition, in a smaller character than that employed in the text, 
the erroneous readings of the Alexandrian MS. being printed in 
the margin. With this brief notice of the four leading printed 
texts, among which, the Roman, or Vatican, is by far the most 
important, we close our observations on the Septuagint version, 
merely adding, that this is still the common version of the Greek 
church ; and we fully subscribe to the conclusion of Moralia, 
" that the Septuagint version still continues free from substantial 
faults, that it contains the word of God, and is, therefore, of 
divine authority." — Introductio. in S. Scrtpturam, torn. 1, p. 
104. 



102 



OE THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



CHAPTEK IY. 

OE THE OTHER ANCIENT GREEK VERSIONS. 

The first of these which demands our notice is the version of 
Aquila. He was born at Sinope, a city of Pontus, and was a 
Jewish proselyte. He made his translation about the year 150 
of our Lord. He rendered the text very literally, so that his 
version looks like a dictionary of the Hebrew words. The 
ancients make mention of two editions of his version. The Jews 
received this translation of Aquila with great applause. It was 
read in their synagogues in place of the Septuagint, with which 
several even of the Hellenists had become dissatisfied on account 
of the esteem in which the Christians held it. We know from 
that Novella of Justinian, mentioned in the foregoing chapter, 
that the Jews had been in the habit of reading Aquila in their 
synagogues. When in the reign of that emperor the dispute 
arose among the Jews, as to whether the scripture should be read 
in the synagogues solely in the Hebrew, with a Chaldaic inter- 
pretation, or the actual practice be continued, by the Hellenists, 
of reading it in Greek ; on this occasion it was, that the emperor 
made the law above referred to, by which each party was 
authorized to follow its own views ; and hence the Hellenists 
were authorized to continue to read Aquila, or the Seventy, in 
the synagogue. Por Justinian gave them a choice of either, and 
his Novella proves that even then the Seventy had not fallen into 
disrepute entirely among the Jews. — Moralia Introduction torn, i, 
&c. We may observe here, that notwithstanding this arrange- 
ment by Justinian, that party prevailed which was for excluding 
the Greek from the synagogue ; and from that time the usage 
has obtained among the Jews of having the scriptures read 
there solely from the Hebrew and Chaldaic. As to the character 
of Aquila' s version, although it is so extremely literal, there is, 
at the same time, no doubt of the author having permitted him- 
self sometimes to be influenced by his Jewish prejudices in the 
execution of his work. This appears from the testimony of the 
fathers, from which St. Jerome, so well qualified to pronounce 
on the matter, does not disagree ; and Kennicott, judging from 
the fragments which remain of this version, subscribes to the 
observations of St. Jerome. 

]S: ext in the order of time comes the version of Theodotion. 
It is supposed to have been made about the year 515. It could 



OF THE SACRED SCKIPTUKES. 



103 



not have been made much later, as it is cited by St. Justin 
Martyr, anno 160, and St. Irenoeus, anno 177. Theodotion, 
according to some, was born in Pontus ; according to others, 
he was a native of Ephesus. He is said to have been a 
Marcionite heretic, and afterwards a Jewish proselyte, or 
Ebionite. (The Ebionites might have been easily confounded 
with the Jewish proselytes, on account of their attachment to 
the ceremonies of the old law.) In his manner of translating, 
Theodotion approaches nearer to the Septuagint than Aquila or 
Symmachus, avoiding as he does the extremely literal manner of 
Aquila, and the paraphrastic freedom of Symmachus. Hence it 
was that Origen took from Theodotion, when he wished to supply 
in his Hexapla what was wanting in the Septuagint as compared 
with the original ; and hence it was also, that, when the pastors 
of the church thought right to cease to read the book of Daniel 
publicly in the church out of the Septuagint, on account of 
the manner in which it was there disfigured through the mis- 
takes of copyists, it was from Theodotion' s version that they read 
this book. This translator permitted himself sometimes to be 
influenced by the prejudices of his party in the interpretation 
of words or passages. "We have made the same observation 
already regarding Aquila, and it applies also to Symmachus, 
whose version we now proceed to notice. 

Symmachus is said to have been first a Samaritan, and then, 
having become a Christian, is said to have gone over to the Jews, 
or to have joined the sect of the Ebionites. He made his ver- 
sion about the year 200. He was so far from confining himself, 
like Aquila, to the literal rendering of the text, that, on the 
contrary, his translation has more the appearance of a paraphrase 
than of an exact version. 

Besides these ancient Greek versions which we have already 
noticed, there are three others which, because their authors are 
unknown, are designated by the names of the fifth, sixth, and 
seventh versions. The first in order of these versions is called 
the fifth, relatively to the four versions already noticed, viz., the 
Septuagint, Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus : whilst the 
rank of these anonymous versions among themselves has been 
determined by the place which they held in the great work of 
Origen, which, when all its columns were occupied, was called 
Enneapla. These three versions, if not all actually discovered 
first by Origen, were at least first brought into notice by him, 
when he travelled into the eastern countries to collect materials 
for his Hexapla. None of these versions contained the entire of 
the Old Testament, but only some books. The fifth version 
comprised the Pentateuch, Psalms, Canticle of Canticles, and the 



104 



0E THE ANCIENT VKESIOITS 



twelve minor prophets, together with the books of Kings. Ac- 
cording to St. Jerome the author was a Jew. 

The sixth version embraced all those books contained in the 
fifth, with the exception of the books of Kings. The author is 
supposed to have been a Jewish convert. That he was a Chris- 
tian at the time of making the version appears by the manner 
in which he translates the thirteenth verse of the third chapter 
f Habacuc, t%r\\Qes rov cwsai rov Xaov ffou dta Iqcrov rov Xpigtou tfo-j. 

The seventh version contained the Psalms and minor pro- 
phets. It is doubtful whether the author was a Jew or a Chris- 
tian. These three versions, the fifth, sixth, and seventh, were 
made after those of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symniachus, but at 
what precise time is not known. They must have been made, 
however, soon after that of Symmachus, seeing that they were 
in existence before that Origen published his Hexapla. ]Sone 
of these anonymous versions were remarkably literal, if it may 
be allowed to pronounce on the matter from the few portions 
of them which remain. The fragments of these versions, as well 
as those of the versions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, 
were first collected and published by Plaminius JSobilius, in his 
notes to the Roman edition of the Septuagint, After him they 
were published by Drucius, in his Veterum Interpretum Grceco- 
rum Fragmenta. This work of Drusius is published in the sixth 
volume of Walton's Polyglot. These fragments are also given 
by Montfaucon, in his valuable edition of the Remains of Origen's 
Hexapla, 2 vols, folio, Paris, 1713. 

Besides these ancient Greek versions already noticed, there 
have been others of which scarcely a fragment remains ; for we 
find in MSS. of the Septuagint certain references in the margin 
to other versions different from those which we have noticed. 
These references are accompanied with the renderings of certain 
passages taken from the versions of which we speak. But we 
need not delay longer in noticing translations of which so little 
can now be known. 

Before concluding this chapter, however, we may briefly 
notice a Greek version preserved in St. Mark's library, at Venice. 
It comprises a considerable portion of the Old Testament, viz., 
the Pentateuch, Proverbs, Ruth, Canticle of Canticles, Ecclesi- 
astes, Lamentations of Jeremias, and Prophecy of Daniel. It was 
published about the end of the last century. The manuscript in 
St. Mark's library is supposed to have been written in the four- 
teenth century ; but the translation of which it is a copy is 
thought by critics to have been made at least as early as the 
twelfth century. It is uncertain whether the author was a Jew 
or a Christian. Whoever he was, he was well acquainted with 



OF TIIE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



105 



the Greek language, and its different dialects. In rendering the 
Chaldee portion of his original he used the Doric dialect ; the 
Hebrew he rendered in the Attic. It is manifest, from the read- 
ings of this version, that the author translated from a manuscript 
of the Masoretic recension. 



CHAPTER V. 

OF THE LATENT VULGATE. 

I. Si story of the Vulgate. — By the Yulgate we mean that 
Latin version of the scriptures which the Council of Trent, in 
its fourth session, declares to be authentic, and which has been 
for many centuries in common use in the Latin church. Use 
had given to it the sanction of the authorised version of the Latin 
church, long before the Council of Trent proclaimed its authen- 
ticity. Taking it as a whole work, we may date its birth about 
the end of the fourth century — in or about the last ten years of 
that century — I say as a whole, because, on examination, we 
shall find that part of it can lay claim to a much higher antiquity. 
In order, then, to trace its early history, we must go a little fur- 
ther back, and see how the faithful of the Latin church were 
provided with the sacred volume before the above-mentioned 
period. The Hebrew scriptures were not, of course, in common 
use anywhere from the commencement of the Christian church. 
This cannot be said of the Greek scriptures of the New Testament 
or of the Septuagint version of the Old — these were read over the 
entire church in its beginning — the Latins even, being then well 
acquainted with the Greek language. Notwithstanding this, 
Latin versions must have been made at a very early period in the 
Western church — these were exceedingly numerous in the time 
of St. Augustine and St. Jerome. St. Augustine says — Lib, de 
JDoctrina Christiana — " Those who have translated the scrip- 
tures into the Greek language can be counted, but the Latin 
interpreters are without number : for, in those early times of the 
faith, when any one procured a Greek copy, and thought that he 
had some facility in both languages, he attempted a translation." 
Eut among these versions there was one in much greater esteem 
than any of the others, because, as St. Augustine says, " to per- 
spicuity it joined a more literal rendering of the words." St. 
Jerome styles it communis, on account of its general use. It is 
frequently, also, referred to by the designation of the Vetus Italica, 
but however the name of Italica or Itala may have come to 
adhere to it, it appears to me that Cardinal Wiseman has proved 



105 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



satisfactorily, in his observations upon a manuscript preserved in 
the library of the convent of Santa Croce at Borne, that this ver- 
sion was made in Africa ; and as appears from the observations 
of the same learned writer, if the name Itala was ever properly 
used to designate this version, then the name must have had 
reference to the recension of this version which was in use in the 
churches of Italy, and which presented certain discrepancies, as 
compared with the original African edition. This version — in 
the Old Testament — was made from the Septuagint version and 
edition. (By the Septuagint edition, I observe once for all, I 
understand the Greek copy of the Old Testament, which com- 
prised all translated by the Seventy, and, at the same time, the 
other books not translated by them.) We know not who the 
translator or the translators were — indeed it does not appear that 
it was the work of one translator. The translators, as far as we 
can judge by the parts of their work which remain at present, 
were thoroughly acquainted with the meaning of the Greek, in 
the Old as well as the New Testament ; and, generally speaking, 
have rendered it very literally. This was the version commonly 
read in the Latin church in the early times. It was in use long 
before the time of St. Jerome, and continued in use after him 
down to the time of St. Gregory the Great, about the year 600. 
St. Gregory distinguishes it from our present Vulgate by calling 
it vet us. We have no exact copy of this version now — although 
Flaminius Nobilius prepared an edition of it, as well as he could 
collect it from the writings and commentaries of the ancient 
fathers. This was published at Borne in 1558. From this 
ancient version a great portion of our present Vulgate has been 
taken. Notwithstanding this, we date our present Vulgate from 
the end of the fourth century, because it was then that St. 
Jerome made his new translation from the original text, and his 
corrections of the old version, which form so much of the Vulgate 
that the whole version is usually ascribed to him, although he 
did not even correct some parts of it. St. Jerome first corrected 
the old translation of the four gospels, at the request of Bop 3 
Damasus ; he afterwards corrected the rest of the New Testa- 
ment, all by the original Greek — " Novum Graecse fldei reddidit." 
This was well received, as appears from St. Augustine, and it is 
this correction which is inserted in our Vulgate. That St. 
Jerome only corrected the ancient Vulgate, and did not translate 
de novo, as far as regards the New Testament, appears from his 
preface addressed to Bope Damasus. x\gain, from the number of 
changes which St. Jerome, in his writings, points out as desirable 
in the old Vulgate of the New Testament, and which we find in 
ours, we have a clear argument for the assertion, that St. 



OF THE SACKED SCRIPTURES. 



107 



Jerome's corrections have been adopted in the version of the 
Latin church. Nor does it make against this conclusion that 
some things have not been changed, although said to require 
change by St. Jerome in his commentaries; for, as he himself 
testifies, he did not make all the changes which he thought 
improvements, lest he might alter too much, and as he wrote 
those commentaries before his correction of the New Testament, he 
might have changed his mind afterwards, as Eellarmine observes, 
JDe Verbo Dei Scripto — de versione Latina Vulgata. St. Jerome 
corrected many books of the Old Testament in the ancient Italic, 
by the Septuagint of Origen's Hexapla, but we are not concerned 
with any of his corrections of the Old Testament except that of 
the Psalms. 

St. Jerome translated the Psalms from the Hebrew, but that 
translation the church has not received into its edition. He also 
translated the Psalms from the Hexaplar edition of the Septua- 
gint. He again twice corrected the psaltery of the old Yulgate 
from the xoivri of Lucian the Martyr, first at Rome in 382 or 
383 ; again at Bethlehem about the year 389. "We have this 
second correction in our Yulgate edition. 

St. Jerome commenced his translations from the Hebrew with 
the books of Kings — they, together witli Job, the great and 
minor prophets, Psalms, and books of Solomon, were finished 
before 392. (This translation of the Psalms is to be seen in his 
works.) Between 392 and 394 Esdras and Genesis were finished. 
He did not finish the rest of the Pentateuch before 404 or 405. 
About the same time were translated Josue, Judges and Ruth. 
Paralipomenon was not finished before the year 396. St. Jerome 
also translated that part of the book of Esther which, in his 
time, was reckoned canonical by the Hebrew Jews — in other 
words, which was then to be found in the Hebrew bibles. St. 
Jerome, moreover, translated Tobias and Judith from the original 
Chaldaic. We have all these translations, except that of the 
Psalms, in our Yulgate. That we have there St. Jerome's trans- 
lations of Tobias and Judith will not be disputed, and for the 
other books just mentioned it is equally certain. Our Yulgate is 
manifestly, in these, a translation from the Hebrew ; now that 
St. Jerome was the only one among the ancients who translated 
from the Hebrew into Latin is beyond all question. Sanctes 
Pagninus, under Leo the Tenth, was next to follow him. Many 
other arguments might be adduced. Bellarmine brings a very 
conclusive argument from St. Jerome's prefaces ; thus — St. 
Jerome testifies, in a letter to St. Augustine, that he prefixed 
prefaces to almost every book translated by him from the 
Hebrew — these prefaces are still preserved in the editions of the 



108 



OF THE ANCIENT VEKSIONS 



Yulgate ; no one denies their authenticity ; now it is incredible 
that this custom of printing the prefaces of St. Jerome with the 
Yulgate would have prevailed, if his translation had been rejected. 
In answer to what might be objected from some discrepancies 
between our Yulgate and the translation which St. Jerome, in 
his commentaries, sometimes recommends, we may say, that in 
these few places the church preferred retaining the old version. 

St. Jerome did not translate the books of Wisdom and Eccle- 
siasticus, the two books of the Machabees, the prophecy of 
Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremias, nor the deutero-canonical por- 
tions of Esther and Daniel. These remain precisely as they 
were in the old, or ante-Hieronymian Yulgate. 

Such is the early history of our Vulgate, which did not dis- 
place the other, or older Latin Yulgate, for two centuries — until 
after the year 600. St. Jerome, in his preface to Paralipomenon, 
says, that if the version of the Seventy had remained pure as it 
came from their hands, it would be a superfluous task to under- 
take a new translation. Eroni this observation, we see that the 
mistakes of copyists had then given some handle to the Jews in 
their appeals from the Septuagint to the original text ; but when 
St. Jerome made the people acquainted with the original, then 
were their clamours effectually silenced. St. Jerome proposed 
to himself to give the sense clearly, not adhering too closely to a 
literal, or verhum verho translation of the text — at the same time 
he did not overstep the limits of a translation. Yery soon after 
the version was completed, it was well received by many, not- 
withstanding the opposition of some, who did not think it advi- 
sable to introduce a new version among the people, so long 
accustomed to another. (This difficulty proved an obstacle to 
St. Jerome's translation of the Psalms ever being received.) 
Lucinius, a Spanish bishop, sent six persons from Spain, in St. 
Jerome's own time, to copy his version. Many think that the 
speculum of St. Augustine was made from this version, but that 
is by no means probable, considering that St. Augustine, 
although he himself thought highly of St. Jerome's translation, 
was perhaps, of all others, the most opposed to its circulation 
among the people, for the reason just now mentioned. The 
learned Cardinal Wiseman is of opinion, that the genuine specu- 
lum of St. Augustine is contained in the Santa Croce MS. to 
which we have already referred in this chapter ; and as to the 
discrepancies between it and the quotations of scripture in the 
other works of St. Augustine, Cardinal Wiseman accounts for 
them, with great probability, by supposing, that St. Augustine 
generally used the Italian recension of the old Yulgate, as he 
first^studied the scripture in Italy, where he was baptized ; but 



OF THE SACRED SCRIFTURES. 



109 



that for his speculum, which was intended for the use of African 
Christians, he used the African edition of the old translation, 
this being the edition to which these people were accustomed. 
However, St. Jerome's version spread rapidly over the church; 
and although St. Gregory the Great speaks of the old and new 
Vulgate being both much used in his time, yet he says of ours, 
that it gave more truly the sense of the Hebrew, and that it was 
in all things most worthy of credit. St. Isidore of Seville testi- 
fies, whilst he prefers St. Jerome's Yulgate to all other Latin 
versions, that in his time it was commonly received by the Chris- 
tian churches and approved of, because " it rendered the words 
more clearly, and gave the sense of the original more faithfully.' 1 
He lived in 630, about twenty-five years after the death of St. 
Gregory. In a word, this version has continued now for more 
than twelve hundred years in general use in the western church. 
This will not be denied at present. We shall not delay to speak 
of those who laboured in correcting mistakes of copiers in the 
Yulgate, before the introduction of printing. The principal 
persons who devoted themselves to this work of correction in 
the middle ages were the learned Alcuin, and Lanfranc, Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, the former in the beginning of the ninth 
century, and Lanfranc in the eleventh. — Glaire, Introduction, 
torn. 1, p. 260. The printed edition of the Yulgate in the Com- 
plutensian polyglot, was carefully prepared. Afterwards Eobert 
Stephens, the famous French printer, and again the divines of 
Louvain, and also those of Paris, gave corrected editions of it. 
Some of these editors bad it in view to meet the wishes of the 
Council of Trent with respect to an exact edition of the Yulgate, 
For, that council in the year 1546, having declared this version 
to be authentic, ordered that it should be most carefully printed. 
However, the task of complying with the council's wish was 
more properly undertaken by the Holy See ; and Sixtus V gave 
to the public, in 1590, the corrected edition, as prepared by a 
number of most learned cardinals. He himself even inspected 
the press. Sixtus was not yet satisfied, and he ordered the 
work to be again submitted to correction, but he died before 
another edition was prepared, and in rapid succession there 
followed Urban VII, Gregory XIV, and innocent IX. It re- 
mained for Clement VIII to finish the work, which he did in 
1592, in which year his edition first appeared. Another edition 
was given in 1593 by Clement, with some slight changes, and 
this is the model of our present bibles, from which no publisher 
or printer is permitted to depart. Even the different readings 
lormerly printed in the margin, must be there omitted. 

Between the editions of Sixtus and Clement, there are 



110 



Or THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



several discrepancies, which have been much dwelt upon by 
many Protestant writers, as if they furnished an argument 
against papal infallibility, and what they call the pretensions of 
Rome. The great hero of these doctors is one Thomas James, 
an Englishman, who wrote a book on this subject, entitled 
Bellum Papale, in which he reckons two thousand instances 
wherein the editions differ. Lest our readers should be startled 
by the number of these discrepancies, let them remember how 
the learned Protestant editor of the Greek Testament, Mill, 
collected thirty thousand various, readings upon that portion 
alone of the scriptures. Admitting that the discrepancies be- 
tween the editions of Sixtus and Clement are as numerous as 
James would represent them, how could the infallibility of the 
pope, or what these would call the pretensions of Rome, that is, 
the infallible authority of the church, be affected thereby ? Did 
any one ever really imagine that the difference between these 
two editions of the Vulgate furnished the least argument against 
these doctrines ? It is hard to believe it ; for there is not a 
shadow of reason for supposing that the Council of Trent, or 
either of these popes, ever thought that it was practicable to bring 
out, in any language, an edition of the scriptures that should be 
perfectly faultless. How then could the infallibility of either 
council or pope be affected by the non-attainment of an end 
which they never proposed to themselves? The authenticity 
which the council or popes claim for the Vulgate, or any edition 
of it, does not mean more- — as we shall see just now — than that 
this edition is free from all error in faith or morals, and that it 
fairly represents the original scriptures in all important particu- 
lars. Now, notwithstanding the discrepancies pointed out by 
James, this character of authenticity, according to this its true 
meaning, is sufficiently realized in both the Sixtine and Clemen- 
tine editions of the Vulgate. Rut they say, that Pope Sixtus' 
bull enjoined that his bible should be read in all churches, with- 
out the least alteration. We answer, that the meaning of the 
decree manifestly is, that as chief pastor of the church he 
guarded — as he had a perfect right to do — the authorized edition 
of the scriptures from being tampered with by any unauthorized 
critic. He had no intention, at the same time, of depriving 
either himself or any of his successors, of the liberty of submit- 
ting this edition to a ntw revision. Hence, it ought not to be a 
mailer of surprise to us, that Sixtus himself really intended a 
new edition of the version with corrections, and that this inten- 
tion was afterwards carried out by Ciement. And even after all 
that Clement has done and decreed respecting the present edi- 
tion of the Vulgate, it is quite clear, that Pius IX, if he so 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



Ill 



pleases, has a perfect right to order a new revision of it. All 
this being so obvious to Catholics, it is no wonder that they 
should be surprised at getting such information as the following 
from a Protestant writer : — " These fatal variances between edi- 
tions, alike promulgated by pontiffs claiming infallibility, have 
not passed unnoticed by Protestant divines, who have taken ad- 
vantage of them in a manner that sensibly affects the church 
of Rome." — Horne, Introduction, vol. ii, p. 237, seventh edition. 
If these variances were of such a character that either popes, by 
sanctioning his own edition, would have sanctioned anything 
that was erroneous in faith or morals, then there would be some 
foundation for this statement : but as the matter stands, to say 
that the church of Home has been sensibly affected by the state 
of the weather for the past year, would be just as sensible an 
observation, as that to which we are here treated by this sapient 
theologian. 

We come to speak now of tbe authority which attaches 
to the Yulgate, in viitue of the declaration of the Council of 
Trent. We must first give the words of the council on which 
we are to comment: — "Si quis libros ipsos (nempe canonicos) 
integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ecclesia Catholica 
legi consueverunt, et in veteri vulgata Latina editione habentur, 
pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, anathema sit." And 
again : — Sacrosancta sy nodus statuit et declarat, ut ex omnibus 
Latinis editionibus, quae circumferuntur, vetus et vulgata editio, 
quae Ion go tot saeculoi um usu in ipsa ecclesia probata est, in 
publicis lectionibus, disputationibus, prsedicationibus, et exposi- 
tionibus, pro authentica habeatur, et ut nemo earn quovis prae- 
textu rejicere audeat vel prsesuroat."— Sessions sexta. 

Prom these words it follows, first — that the Yulgate is authen- 
tic in all its parts; secondly — that no one is at liberty to reject 
its authority ; and thirdly — that it is at least preferred by the 
council to all the other Latin versions then published. Any 
deed or writing is authentic when it is entitled to be believed to 
be what it pretends to be. In consequence, therefore, of the 
declaration of the council that the Yulgate is authentic, we must 
look upon this version as a faithful translation of its original. 
But must we believe it to be a correct version in every word and 
iota ? Leo Allatius, quoted by Hichard ISimon, refers to a decree 
of the congregation of the council (interpres Concilii scilicet 
Tridentini), according to which no Catholic would be permitted 
to hold that there is any, even the slightest defect in the version. 
This decree is dated 1576 ; but we do not admit its genuineness, 
seeing the opinions held since by the most respectable divines ; 
and we know, on the other hand, that there exist fictitious 



112 



OF THE ANCIENT VEBSI0NS 



decrees of that congregation. Some theologians, at the same time, 
have insisted on the truth of the conclusion, that in virtue of the 
council 1 s decision we must look on the Yulgate as free from the 
least fault on the part of the translator. Others have adopted a 
far different opinion, viz., that the council merely declares that 
there is nothing in the version opposed to faith or good morals. 
The declaration of the council appears to give a higher authority 
to the version than in this latter opinion would attach to it. 
Eellarmine says, " We admit that the interpreter was' not a 
prophet, and could have erred ; but we say that he has not erred 
in that version which the church has approved of. The church 
wished to make us certain, in those things especially that apper- 
tain to faith and morals, that there are no mistakes of translators 
in this version." — Be Verbo Dei Scripto ; de editione vulgata. 
Duhamel says, the Yulgate is authentic, although it is not entirely 
free from every defect or slight mistake. — (See his dissertation 
prefixed to the Dublin edition of Menochius' Commentary.) 
Bontrerius (in the Praeloquia) is of opinion, that the word authentic 
implies more than merely not being opposed to faith or morals ; 
but he would not assert that the interpreter was, in his transla- 
tion, quite exempt from human infirmity ; nor does he think 
that the council wished to define that he was. For this he 
quotes Andreas Yega, who was present at the council, and the 
cardinal president, who was afterwards Pope Marcellus II. An 
authentic version must mean a version which fairly represents 
its original. jN t ow, a version might contain nothing opposed to 
faith or morals, and yet not fairly represent its original ; therefore 
it is not sufficient for the authenticity of a version, that it contain 
nothing inconsistent with faith or morality. The meaning of 
the council, therefore, appears to be truly given by Girardeau : 
" That substantially, and in all things of any moment, this 
version does not depart from the true sense of the scripture." — 
Prcelectiones Theologicce de Verbo Dei Scripto. 

The strictest defender of the accuracy of the version will ad- 
mit with Bellarruine, that in four cases we may have recourse to 
the original : Pirst — when there appears to be an error of the 
copiers in our books ; second — when the Latin copies differ from 
each other, that we may discover the true reading of the Yulgate ; 
third — when a phrase or sentence is doubtful in the Latin text, 
in order to remove the ambiguity ; fourth — to understand the 
force and propriety of words. Bellarmine adduces examples of 
all these cases in his treatise De Verbo Dei Scripto {liber 2dus 
cap. undecimum). Moreover, it is so certain that the council 
did not intend to depreciate the originals by the sanction given 
to the Yulgate, that the assertion, which would imply the contrary 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



113 



is classed by Bellarmine among the lies of Calvin, {Libro 
jam citato, cap. x.) The fathers speak not at all in their decree 
of the originals, but only of the Latin versions. 

Another question which presents itself is this — did the council 
select a good version when it pronounced on the authenticity of 
the Yulgate ? We answer — most certainly it did. This appears, 
as well from the character of St. Jerome, and the abundant 
means of arriving at the true sense of the original which were 
available to him, as also from the abundant testimonies of ancient 
and modern critics in its favour. St. J erome either translated, 
or corrected by the original, all the scripture about the sense of 
which the sectaries of theseflatter ages and we dispute — except 
the Psalms, of which we shall speak afterwards. .Now, St. 
J erome was well acquainted with Latin, Greek, and Hebrew ; 
this was not denied even by those who were opposed to his under- 
taking. The Chaldaic, also, he had studied with great care. His 
talents and theological knowledge were of the highest order ; 
then he had collected at Bethlehem a rich library ; he had there 
all the versions of the scripture. He had his instructions in 
Hebrew from the famous school of Tiberias — the most learned of 
the Jewish academies — regarded as such by the most learned 
Jews ; he had an assistant in his labours from it. He had the 
great advantage of being able to consult the Hexapla of Origen, 
which has since been lost, having been destroyed in 653, at the 
siege of Csesarea, where it had been deposited, together with 
other books of Origen. He lived in that country where the 
scenes of the scripture history had been, for the most part, laid. 
If we join to all this his great and indefatigable labour, and 
that piety for which he was so much distinguished, and which 
would prevent him from substituting a rash conjecture for a 
known truth, may we not then safely assert that our version 
deserves to be looked upon as a work of the greatest merit, 
seeing how well qualified in every way St. Jerome was for the 
task which he undertook. 

We shall come to the same conclusion about the merits of 
this version if we weigh well the testimonies of ancient and 
modern critics in its favour. We have already noticed the high 
opinion entertained of it by St. Gregory the Great, St. Isidore of 
Seville, and others. St. Augustine's attachment to the old ver- 
sion made from the Septuagint ' is well known, and yet he thus 
writes in his book, (18th, c. 43, de Civitate Dei',) " Quamvisnon 
de fuerit temporibus nostris presbyter Hieronymus, homo cloctis- 
simus et omnium trium linguarum peritus, qui non ex Greeco sed 
ex Hebrseo in Latinum eloquium easdem scripturas conveiterit ; 
sed ejus tarn litteratum laborem quamvis Judasi fateantur esse 

i 



114 OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 

veracem," &c: — "Although there has not heen wanting in our 
times the priest Jerome, a most learned man, skilled in all the 
three languages, who translated the same scriptures, not from 
the Greek, but from the Hebrew into the Latin tongue ; but 
although the Jews acknowledged that his learned labour is dis- 
tinguished by fidelity," &c. This testimony of St. Augustine is 
peculiarly valuable, inasmuch as it not only conveys to us the 
high opinion which he himself entertained of the version, but 
also makes us aware of the fact, that the Jews even acknowledged 
its fidelity. But superior to a hundred testimonies of ancient 
times is the universal reception in the Latin Church of this ver- 
sion ih preference to so many others. 

As to modern testimonies, we shall for an obvious reason 
pass over those of Catholic critics. Protestant critics, however, 
and those the most learned of that body, may be abundantly 
quoted, as bearing testimony to the fidelity and excellence of 
this version. We shall then cite a few of these. Grotius, con- 
fessedly a high authority with biblical critics, held our version in 
high esteem, alleging as his reason, "that it contains nothing 
but sound doctrine, and that its author is lull of erudition." — Gro- 
tius, Prcef. Annotationem in Vet. Test. It was this esteem for the 
Vulgate that induced Grotius, as he tells us, to make that version 
the basis of his notes on the Old Testament. Paul Fagius, who 
was appointed by Cranmer to teach Hebrew in Cambridge, 
thought so highly of the Yulgate that he treats those as half- 
learned and impudent fellows who spoke slightingly of this 
famous translation. Drusius, for some time professor of oriental 
languages in Oxford, speaks highly of this version, and praises 
the Council of Trent for the preference which it gave it (the Yul- 
gate) above the modern versions of the scripture. The references 
to Eagius and Drusius may be seen in Richard Simon's Kistoire 
Critique du Vieux 'Testament, liv. 2, chap. 14. Walton, in the 
prolegomena to his Polyglot, adds his testimony in favour of the 
excellence of this version, saying, "Although we do not call it- 
divine, we yet say that it is highly to be esteemed and not rashly 
set aside, as well on account of its antiquity and general use 
throughout the west for a thousand years, as on account of the 
learning and fidelity of the translator, whom we admit to have 
been Jerome in the greater part of the work, the same who is 
gratefully acknowledged by the most learned Protestants to have 
deserved well of the church." — Prolegomenon 10, sectio ult. He 
then goes on to state, that Beza in the JNew Testament preferred 
the Yulgate to all other Latin versions, and censured Erasmus for 
condemning it because it does not agree always with the modern 
Greek copies ; "whereas," says Beza, "it appears to have iol- 



OF THE SACKED SCRIPTURES. 



115 



lowed a more correct Greek copy." Walton adds, that Beza's 
own attacks on the version were severely criticised by a learned 
Protestant (John Boys, prebendary of Ely, in England), who, by 
the desire of Launcelot Andrews (the Protestant bishop of Ely), 
wrote a defence of the Vulgate against Beza. Mill, who spent 
thirty years in preparing his famous edition of the New Testa- 
ment, informs us (in the prolegomena to his Greek Testament, 
p. 142), that he considered the fragments of the old Italica as 
more precious than gold ; he wished that St. Jerome had not 
departed so much from it in his correction of the New Testa- 
ment; but yet, speaking of our version in the New Testament, 
as it stands after St. Jerome's revision, he says, " Quam certe 
tantum abest, ut ad Graecuni excusum quemcunque reformatam 
velim, ut contra, optime cum ea actum existimem, si MSS. 
exemplarium diiigenter collatorum ope talis apud posteros prodeat 
cpialem earn edidit Hieronynius." We see, therefore, that in 
Mill's judgment, to procure an exact Latin version, we ought 
not to attempt to reform the Yulgate according to any printed 
Greek edition, but to make the required corrections by collating 
the ancient Latin MSS. We may add here the judgment which 
Lewis de Dieu, a man famous for his knowledge of the languages, 
passes upon the Yulgate. The words are quoted by Walton (in 
the place before cited, Prolegomen. 10, versus Jinem), from a work 
of De Dieu's upon the gospels. De Dieu is comparing the Syriac, 
Arabic, and other versions, with the Yulgate and the versions by 
Erasmus and Beza. His words are : " Si vulgatuin interpretem, 
quisquis is tandem fuerit, doctuni, imo doctissimum viruin fuisse 
asseram, non me peccasse judicavero ; suos habet nsevos fateor, 
habet et suos barbarismos, sed quin passim ejus fideni judieiuin- 
que admirer, etiam ubi barbarus videtur negare non possum." 
" Were I to assert that the Yulgate translator, whosoever he was 
(for in the New Testament he is unknown), was learned — nay, 
most learned — I should not consider that I had erred. He has his 
blemishes, I admit, he has also his barbarisms ; but I cannot deny 
that I most admire his fidelity and judgment even where he 
appears to be barbarous." Hence De Dieu often, among the 
various readings, prefers that of the Yulgate to the rest, and 
defends it against lie za. AYalton cites a number of instances of 
this from his work. Such are the testimonies even of the most 
learned Protestants in favour of our version. No doubt several 
Protestants have spoken disparagingly of the Yulgate, but in this 
they have been led by their prejudices rather than their judg- 
ment. On this point a recent Protestant writer thus speaks (Dr. 
Samuel Davidson, Sacred Her meneutics, p. 625): " This transla- 
tion has been highly esteemed by the most competent judges, 



116 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



although, in consequence of the excessive veneration in which 
Eomanists have held it since the Council of Trent, some Protes- 
tants have injudiciously and unjustly underrated its value. As 
a relic of antiquity, proceeding in the greater part of it from 
Jerome, it is interesting ; and, as giving a certain interpretation 
to the text, it deserves to be consulted by every student of the 
bible. In general it is very literal, so as even to express Hebrew 
and Greek idioms in barbarous Latinity, from its close adherence 
to the original words." 

The conclusion which we ought to deduce from all that has 
been said is, that although the Council of Trent did not intend 
to depreciate the originals, nor to pronounce St. Jerome inspired 
in making his translation, nor the ancient interpreter either in 
the parts which have been retained from Mm ; yet that no 
Hebrew or Greek MS. extant, or printed copy of the sacred text, 
can be equally depended upon, as containing throughout the pure 
word of God ; because, in the first place, we have not the same 
formal testimony of the church in favour of any of these MSS. 
or printed copies ; and because, in the next place, considering 
the high esteem in which our version has been held, even by the 
most learned adversaries of the church, and at the same time 
considering its general use in the western church for so many 
hundred years, together with the fact that it was made at a 
period anterior to the date of the most ancient known Hebrew or 
Greek MS. — we ought, in consequence of all this, and even 
abstracting from the declaration of the Council of Trent, to look 
upon this version as a safer guide to the knowledge of what the 
sacred pensmen wrote, than any extant copy whatever of the 
original text. 

The limits which we have prescribed to ourselves do not 
permit us to delay much longer in treating of this version, yet 
there are still some points which demand a few words from us. 
First — we have observed already, that a part of our Vulgate in 
the Old Testament has been taken from the old, or ante-Hier- 
onymian Yulgate, without any alteration. In the New Testament, 
we have the ante-Hieronymian translation, as corrected by St. 
Jerome, according to the original Greek. In the Old Testament, 
we have one book — the book of Psalms — taken from the old 
Italica as corrected by St. Jerome, not according to the original 
Hebrew, but according to the Septuagint, from which the ver- 
sion was originally made. St. Jerome made a translation of the 
Psalms from the Hebrew, bnt it was not thought prudent to 
adopt it as the common version, seeing how much accustomed 
the people were to the singing and reciting of the Psalms from 
the ancient Yulgate. St. Jerome twice corrected the Psalms by 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



117 



the Septuagint. He first made a slight correction of them, 
which was adopted in the Roman church. His second correc- 
tion was made with greater diligence, and was first adopted by 
the churches of Gaul, hence it is called the Galilean Psaltery. 
The former edition, that is, the first correction of St. Jerome, 
having been retained for a considerable time by the church of 
Rome, is called the Roman Psaltery. It is the Gallican Psal- 
tery which we have in our Yulgate. The church at Rome 
adopted the Gallican Psaltery — Mariana thinks, in the time of 
Charlemagne, or rather in the time of Pope Nicholas III — 
Marianas, Piss ertatio pro Ed 'it ione Vulyata, cap. xix. 

Secondly. — We do not deny that the sanction of the Council 
of Trent may consist with slight mistakes in our version, or 
the edition of it which we use ; for, as Mariana observes (Ibidem, 
cap. xx,) the council has declared it authentic cum omnibus suis 
partibus, not cum omnibus suis partieulis, that is, in all its parts, 
not in all its particles. Such is the extent to which the council 
has gone ; and we trust that enough has been said to \nake it 
clear, that the council had good reason for approving, as it did, 
of this ancient version. 



CHAPTER YI. 

OF THE SYRIAC VERSIONS OF THE SCRIPTURES. 

It is admitted by all, that the Christians of Syria must have 
been provided with a version of the sacred scriptures in their 
own language from an early period of the church ; both because 
vast numbers of the people in those countries comprehended under 
the name of Syria were unacquainted with the Greek language, 
and because the offices of the church, which are in such great 
part taken from the scripture, have been always celebrated there 
in Syriac. 

Among the Syriac versions known to us, by far the most im- 
portant is that one which has been designated by the Syrians 
the Peschito or simple, as the word is commonly explained. In 
what sense this appellation is given to it is a question among 
critics. Some suppose that it is intended to express the literal 
character of the version — others, the fidelity of the version, 
whilst others contend that it simply designates a translation, as 
opposed to an allegorical paraphrase, or explanation of the origi- 
nal text. This version was made from the Hebrew, in the Old 
Testament — at what precise period we know not. Some Syrian 
writers would have us to believe that it was made, at least in a 



118 



OF THE AXCIEXT VERSIONS 



great part, in the time of Solomon ; other Syrians refer it to the 
time of the captivity of the ten tribes ; and others, somewhat 
more moderate, to the time of Thaddeus the apostle ; but these 
statements are all rejected by modern critics, whilst these latter 
differ among themselves respecting the time at which it was 
probably made, although they are, in general, agreed in admit- 
ting its very high antiquity. Walton, Carpzov, Leusden, and 
Xennicott, refer it to the first century of the Christian era : 
whilst many of the German critics think that it cannot claim a 
higher antiquity than the second or third century. Jahn leans 
to the opinion which refers it to the second century. It is cer- 
tain that St. Ephram, who lived in the fourth century, often 
refers to this version in a manner which shows that in his time 
it was well known, and of long standing in the Syrian churches. 
There is no doubt but this version has been made from the 
Hebrew in the Old Testament ; this is manifest from the exact- 
ness with which it generally renders that text : however, in 
some plSces it so conforms to the Septuagint version, as to leave 
scarcely any doubt but that it has been remodelled in several 
places upon that version, or, at least, accommodated in these 
places to other Syriac versions which have been made from the 
Septuagint. The Xew Testament, which has been certainly 
made from the Greek text, dates as early as the second century 
of our era, or, at the latest, the beginning of the third. This 
ancient version, both in the Old and !New Testament, has been 
always held in great repute by all the Christians of Syria, with- 
out distinction of sect or party. Another proof of its great an- 
tiquity — for it appears by this, that the version did not emanate 
from any of these parties into which the Syrian Christians are 
now divided, but that it was made when all belonged to the one 
true church.* 

It would appear from the different manner of translating 
which is found in some parts of the Old Testament, as compared 
with others, that this Peschito- Syriac was not the work of one 

* At present we find in the country of Syria — the Maronites, whose 
name is variously accounted for. Some derive it from John Maron, a 
Syrian writer of the party of the Monothelites ; but this opinion has been 
successfully combated by Kairon, a learned Maronite, who, in a disserta- 
tion published at Rome in 1679, has proved that the name is derived from 
St. Maron, a celebrated anchoret of the fourteenth century, whose life is 
written by Theodoret. One thing is certain, that at the present day the 
Maronites profess the true faith, and are united to the Roman See. 
Second, we find also at present, in the countries of Syria, the followers of 
the Xestorian heresy. Third, the followers of the Eutychian heresy, 
more commonly called there Jacobites, from one James the Syrian, other- 
wise called Baradaeus, or Zanzalus, who rejected the Council of Chalcedon, 
and was, after Eutyches, a great leader of the Monophysite heretics. 



OE THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



119 



hand. The author, or authors, of the version, merely translated 
in the Old Testament what was found on the canon of the 
Hebrew Jews ; and, in the New Testament, they passed over 
almost all those parts which are termed deutero-canonical, in 
consequence of partial doubts having been entertained in the 
church, in the very early times, regarding their canonicalness ; 
hence, they have not given the second and third epistles of St. 
John, the second epistle of St. Peter, the epistle of St. Jude, and 
the Apocalypse. Of course, the omitted books both in the Old 
and New Testament were soon after given to the Syrian churches 
by means of other versions ; for the canonicalness of all these 
books has been held in the Syrian church from a very early 
period, and before that the various sects broke off from it, and 
hence all these agree in admitting the same canon of scripture. 

The fundamental printed edition of this Peschito version in 
the Old Testament is that given in the Paris polyglot, by Le 
Jay, who, in preparing it for publication, was assisted by Gabriel 
Sionita, a learned Maronite. An improved edition of it was 
afterwards given by "Walton in the London polyglot — it was 
corrected for this edition after four new MSS. 

The New Testament portion, was first printed at Vienna, by 
Widmanstad. Moses of Marden, a Maronite priest, assisted in 
bringing it out. This Moses of Marden was the first to make 
known in Europe the Peschito- Syriac : he was sent by Ignatius, 
patriarch of the Maronite Christians, in the year 1552, to Pope 
Julius III, to acknowledge the supremacy of the Roman 
Pontiff, — Butler, Hora Bihliccs, section 13. Other editions of 
this New Testament have been since printed : the best is that 
printed at Leyden in 1708, and afterwards in 1717 ; it bears the 
names of John Leusden and Charles Schaff as editors, although 
Leusden died before the work was brought as far as the gospel 
of St. John. — Le Long, BMiotheca Sacra, torn. 1 ; Be Bibl'us 
Syriacis Lnpressis, anno 1708. 

We have now described the principal Syriac version. There 
is no doubt but that at a somewhat later period than the date of 
the Peschito, the Syrians had another version introduced among 
them, made from the Septuagint, but whether they had more 
than one version — in other words, whether the names of Figured, 
Philoxenian, Har clean, used by writers on these matters, refer to 
different versions, or different editions of the same version, it is 
impossible to decide. De Sacy, who has examined, at least, one 
such version from the Septuagint, thinks that it was made as 
early as the third or fourth century. — Glaire, Introd. torn. 1, 
p. 289. The edition examined by De Sacy is that which is 
often referred to by the name of the figured version, a name sup= 



120 



OF THE ANCIEXT VEESIOXS 



posed to be applied to it in contradistinction to the simple version, 
Assemani [Billiot. Orient., iii, 146,) however, has proved, that 
the name fig ure d has originated from mistaking the meaning of a 
word used by Gregory Bar-Hebra3us, in speaking of this version. 
This Gregory Bar-Hebrseus was a celebrated writer among the 
Jacobites in the thirteenth century : he speaks of two Syrian 
versions ; and according to the correct reading of his words, says, 
" the western Syrians have two versions — that simple version (of 
which he had spoken immediately before,) which was translated 
from the Hebrew language into the Syriac, after the coming of 
the Lord Christ, in the time of Adeus (Thaddeus) the apostle, or, 
according to others before him, in the time of Solomon the son 
of David and Hiram king of Tyre ; and another which was 
translated from the Greek of the Septuagint into Syriac, a consi- 
derable time after the Incarnation of the Saviour.' ' We may 
observe here, that this writer is quoted sometimes by the name 
of Gregory Bar-Hebrseus — sometimes by that of Gregory Abul- 
pharagius, although in B earner's edition of Le Long it is 
stated to be an error to confound, as many do, Bar-Hebreeus, 
who was archbishop of Antioch, with Abulpharagius, who 
was a celebrated physician of the same century, and a Syrian 
also. — Billiofheca Sacra, torn. 1, p. 175. But to proceed: 
there are various other Syriac versions cited, but they may 
be, perhaps, but different editions of that one of which we 
have been speaking, denominated the figured by many, as we 
have observed. Among these other so-called versions, the most 
remarkable are — first, the Philoxenian, so called because made 
by the orders of Philoxenus, bishop of Hierapolis, a celebrated 
Jacobite, in the beginning of the sixth century. Second, the 
Harclean, made by Thomas Heracleensis, as he is cited by Latin 
writers. This is thought by many to be but a mere revision of 
the Philoxenian ; and, undoubtedly, if we admitted the authen- 
ticity of an extract given in Le Long, from a MS. in the library 
of St. Lawrence at Florence, we should have no doubt upon the 
subject; for, this extract professes to give the testimony of 
Thomas himself, to the effect that he revised the Philoxenian 
after three Greek MSS. kept in the monastery of St. Anthony 
at Alexandria, in the nine hundred and twenty-seventh year of 
Alexander, that is, the six hundred and fifteenth of Christ. The 
four gospels of the Harclean version, or revision, were printed at 
Oxford in 1778. Finally, there is another Syriac version, or 
edition, designated by the name of the Hexaplar, because made 
from Origen's Hexaplar edition of the Septuagint. This version 
is ascribed by Eichhorn to Paul, bishop of Telia, who is supposed 
to have made it about the year of Christ 615. 



OF THE SACEED SCRIPTURES. 



121 



We may observe in conclusion, that amidst the conflicting 
opinions of writers on the subject of which we are treating, the 
only thing that seems absolutely certain is, that the Syrians have 
been from a very early period provided with two versions, at 
least, of the sacred scripture : the first and more ancient, the 
Peschito, made from the Hebrew in the Old Testament; the 
other made from the Septuagint in the Old Testament. 

Those who wish to see more upon the principal version of the 
Syriac church — the Peschito, and particularly upon the Karka- 
phensian recension of it, may consult the learned work of the 
illustrious Cardinal Wiseman, entitled Horce Syriaca. 



CHAPTER VII. 

OE THE EGYPTIAN VERSIONS. 

The Egyptian versions are those which are found in the ancient 
language of the Christians of Egypt. This language is denomi- 
nated Coptic, from the name given to the people that used it, 
i.e., Copts. The Copts are the descendants of that .mixture of 
Egyptians, Persians, and, above all, Greeks, who, under the 
Ptolemys and Constantines, were long in possession of Egypt. 
Some derive their names from the mode in which the Saracens 
pronounced the name Jacobites, to which sect this Egyptian 
people belonged when the Saracens took possession of their 
country ; others derive it from the name of a city in Egypt, 
Coptos ; others, in fine, from a contraction of the Greek name of 
Egypt, A/yv<rro{. When the Greeks first established them- 
selves in Egypt, the Greek language became the language of 
Alexandria and its vicinity ; but in remote parts of the country 
the people continued to speak their ancient language, which, 
however, soon became mixed to a very great extent with Greek. 
It is this mixture which is designated by the general name of 
Coptic, although its various dialects differ very much from each 
other. As we have observed already, the Copts belong to the 
sect of the Jacobites, or Monophy sites, rejecting the Council of 
Chalcedon, which they falsely charge with having advocated the 
Nestorian heresy. The Christians of Egypt who received the 
Council of Chalcedon, as well as the other Christians through- 
out Syria who submitted to the same council, were denominated 
by the Copts, Melchites, or Koyalists — the Syriac word meleh 
signifying king. This name they gave them because they sub- 
mitted to the edict of the Emperor Marcian, by which he com- 
manded submission to the decrees of the council. As to the 



122 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



Melehites, clown to a late period they have celebrated the liturgy 
in the Greek language ; latterly, however, the difficulty of find- 
ing priests and deacons who know how to read the Greek, has 
induced them to celebrate the Mass in Arabic. The Copts have 
always used the Coptic language in the liturgy ; and even now, 
when it is no longer understood by the people, it remains in the 
liturgy, of which they have an Arabic translation, in order that 
the priests may know the meaning of what is read in the Coptic. 
After having read the lessons of the office, the epistles, and 
gospels, in Coptic, they read them again from an Arabic bible. 
The scripture must have been translated into the Coptic at a very 
early period, seeing that the people who used this language did 
not understand Greek. It is commonly admitted that transla- 
tions of the Old and jSew Testaments into Coptic were made as 
early as the second or third century of the Christian era. Many 
versions both of the Old and New Testament are found in this 
language ; and, indeed, one version could not have answered for 
all the people who spoke the Coptic, inasmuch as this language 
is split up into various dialects, which differ greatly one from the 
other. These dialects are : first — the Sahidic, so called from 
Saul, the Arabic name of Upper Egypt ; second — the Memphitic, 
or Coptic properly so called, which was the dialect of the Lower 
Egypt, and receives its name from the city of Memphis, now 
Grand Cairo ; lastly — the Bashnuric dialect, so denominated 
from Eashmur, a province of the Delta. The Coptic translations 
of the Old Testament were made from the Greek of the Septua- 
gint. A Coptic version of the Pentateuch was published in 
London, in 1 731, by David Wilkins. The Psaltery was published 
at Rome, by the Propaganda, in 1744 and 1749. The ninth 
chapter of Daniel was also published at Rome by Miinter, 
in 1786, both in Memphitic and Sahidic. In the year 1816 
Engelbreth published at Copenhagen some fragments of the 
Old and New Testaments in the Bashmuric dialect. Some 
books of the Old Testament in the Coptic version cannot 
now be found, although known to have been translated 
from the fact that select portions from them are read, at 
stated times, in the public offices of the church. There are, 
however, always new discoveries being made of Coptic MSS. 
Thus Glaire mentions (Introdiic. torn. 1, p. 225, note), that Dr. 
Dujardin, sent by the Prench minister of public instruction, M. 
De Salvandy, into Egypt, to collect Coptic MSS., had written 
from Cairo announcing, as the result of his search, the discovery 
of various books of the scripture. We may observe, that among 
others, he mentions the books of Baruch and "Wisdom — a new 
proof of the fact that the Copts place upon their canon those 



OF THE S ACHED SCRIPTURES. 



123 



books of the Old Testament termed deutero-canonical, received by- 
Catholics, and rejected as apocryphal by the Protestants. 

We have three versions of the ISTew Testament : — one in the 
Memphitic dialect, which was printed at Oxford in 1716, under 
the superintendence of David Wilkin s ; another in Sahidic, 
which appears to be as ancient as the preceding, which is refer- 
red to the third century. ' Fragments of the gospels of this 
Sahidic version have been often published ; Woide, in particular, 
undertook to publish a Sahidic ]S"ew Testament, but death having 
overtaken him before the work was completed, it was continued 
after him by Ford, and printed at Oxford in 1799.— ( G laire, ubi 
supra). The third version is in the Bashmuric dialect. Of the 
Eashmuric ISTew Testament there have been published only some 
fragments of the gospels and of the epistles of St. Paul. This 
version appears to be as ancient as either of the preceding. See 
Masch's edition of Le Long Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. i, pars 2da, 
sectio 10. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

I. OF THE ARABIC VERSIONS. EE. OF THE ETHIOPIAN VERSION. 

in. OF THE PERSIAN VERSIONS. IV. OF THE ARMENIAN 

VERSION. 

I. — The Arabic language was for a very long period confined 
within the limits of the country from which it derives its name ; 
but by the conquests of Mahomet and his followers it was spread 
over an immense portion of the world. It is undoubtedly one 
of the most ancient languages in existence, and excels all others 
in copiousness ; it bears a great affinity to the Hebrew. There 
are various Arabic versions of the scripture, but none of them 
are considered of much importance in biblical criticism, as there 
is no sufficient reason for looking upon any of them as moie 
ancient than the age of Mahomet. Besides, there are but few 
which have been made from the original texts. The Arabic 
versions considered most deserving of notice are the following : 
First — the Arabic version of the Pentateuch and Isaias, made 
by Eabbi Saadias (iaon, of Egypt, from the Hebrew text. It is 
referred to the commencement of the tenth century. The trans- 
lation is in the style of a paraphrase. Saadias is said to have 
translated also Job and the Psalms. The Pentateuch and Isaias 
have been published ; the other bo # oks translated by him are still 
in manuscript. Second— another Arabic version of the Penta- 
teuch made from the Hebrew is that one published by Erpenius, 



124 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



at Leyden, in 1622; it is ascribed to an African Jew of the 
thirteenth century. It is much more literal than the preceding-. 
Hence many learned men prefer it to the other — among the rest 
Walton, although he has given in his polyglot Saadias' version 
m preference. Third— the version of the bpok of Josue given in 
the Paris and London polyglots, has been manifestly made from 
the Hebrew. , As Baver observes, it is sufficient, in order to be 
convinced of this, to compare this version with the Hebrew text. 
It is not known at what time, nor by whom this version was 
made. There are various other Arabic translations made from 
the Hebrew which are still unpublished. Among these the 
most remarkable is a version of the Pentateuch made from the 
Hebrew of the Samaritan Pentateuch, for the use of the Samari- 
tans, by a certain Abou Said, in the thirteenth century. , Fourth. 
— among the Arabic versions made from the Peschito-Syriac is 
reckoned the book of Job, found in the Paris and London poly- 
glots. There are some other manuscript versions made from the 
same Peschito-Syriac. It was the common opinion of the learned, 
that the Arabic version of all the books contained in the polyglots 
of Paris and London, with the exception of the Pentateuch, Josue, 
and Job, was made from the Greek of Hesychius' or Lucian's 
edition of the Septuagint ; but a German critic, named iEini- 
lius Rcediger, in a work upon the subject, praised by De Sacy 
as a masterpiece of profound and accurate criticism, has proved 
that this opinion is, with respect to a very great part of that 
version, perfectly without foundation. In fact, Eoediger has 
established, by a minute investigation of the matter, that, in the 
first place, the source of this Arabic version has not been the 
Greek Septuagint ; that, secondly, the following parts have been 
translated from the Syriac version : The book of Judges, of Ruth, 
and two first books of Kings, called the books of Samuel ; the 
eleven first chapters of the third book of Kings ; the fourth book 
ot Kings, from verse seventeenth of the twelfth chapter to 
chapter twenty-fifth, inclusively ; and the book, of Nehemias, 
from verse twenty-eighth of the ninth chapter to the thirtieth 
chapter inclusively. He has proved, thirdly, that the follow- 
ing portions have been translated from the Hebrew : In the third 
book of Kings, chapter twelfth and following, to the twenty- 
first inclusively ; and in the fourth book of Kings, the eleven 
first chapters, with a part of the twelfth. Finally, he has 
proved that the first part of Nehemias, that is to say, from the 
commencement of the book to the twenty-seventh verse of the 
ninth chapter, although translated at first by a Jew from the 
original text, was afterwards interpolated by some Christian, 
who followed the Syriac version. — ^inilius Eoediger, de Origine 



OF THE SACRED SCULPTURES. 



125 



et indole Arabicce Libroram Historicorum Interpretationis, libri 
duo, Halis Saxonum, 1829. 

Various editions have been given of the JSew Testament in 
Arabic. In some the translation has been made from the Greek ; 
in others, from the Syriac version ; in others, in fine, from the 
Yulgate. Among these editions the principal is that one of the 
four gospels given at Rome in the year 1590, with the Yulgate 
interlined ; it appears to have been made from the Greek. It 
was inserted, with some corrections, in the Paris polyglot, and 
aiterwards, but with many additional corrections, in that of Lon- 
don. Erpenius published the Arabic ]S"ew Testament at Leyden, 
in 1616, from a MS. written in Upper Egypt in the year 1342. 
See Masch's edition of Le Long, vol. i, part 2da. sectione 5ta. 

II. Of the Ethiopian version. — Ethiopia is first known in 
history by the name of Lud ; this is the name by which it is 
designated in several parts of the Old Testament. As Charles 
Butler observes, it was a nation of blacks from the banks of the 
Indus, who established a powerful empire in the African Lydia, 
that first gave the country the name of Ethiopia. These were 
conquered by the Abyssinians, who came from the southern part 
of Arabia Eelix, in the reign of Const an tine the Great. This 
people (the Ethiopians or Abyssinians) was converted to Christian- 
ity in the fourth century, and towards the ninth fell into the 
Eutychian heresy : afterwards they embraced various other 
errors borrowed from Judaism, and even paganism. — Butler, 
Horce Biblicce, sec. 13, with me, p. 107. The Ethiopian version 
of the scripture with which we are acquainted is in the ancient 
language of Abyssinia, not the language now in use — the lan- 
guage which it most nearly resembles is the Arabic. This 
version, as Glaire observes, (Introduction torn, i, p. 293,) 
appears to be the same as that mentioned by St. Chrysostom, 
(Bom. 2, in Joanneni) and to date from the fourth century, when 
Eiumentius, ordained bishop by St. Athanasius, went to preach 
the Christian religion in Abyssinia. Of the Old Testament, 
which was translated from the Septuagint, there have been 
printed the four first chapters of Genesis ; published at Leyden, 
in 1660, afterwards at Erancfort, in 1696, with a Latin trans- 
lation, and often since ; the book of Ruth, which appeared at 
Leyden in 1660 ; the Psalms, which have been printed frequently 
— they are given in the London polyglot ; the Canticle or Can- 
ticles, Joel, Jonas, Sophonias and Alalachy, printed separately 
and at different places. Of this Ethiopian version the ]Sew 
Testament has been also translated from the Greek. It was 
printed at Rome in 1548 — (see Glaire, obi supra). This edition 
was reprinted by Walton in his polyglot. Tnere is in England 



126 



OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 



a manuscript copy of the entire Ethiopian scriptures, which was 
purchased "by one of the bible societies. 

III. Of the Persian versions. — While the ancient empire of 
Persia subsisted, Persia had a language of her own. In the 
course of time that country became successively subject to the 
Greeks, the Romans, the Saracens, and the Turks ; and each of 
them introduced some alterations into the language of the Per- 
sians. The modern language of Persia is a mixture of all ; but 
the Arabic and Turkish predominate. We are acquainted with 
three Persian versions of the scripture — one contains only the 
Pentateuch ; it is not more ancient than the ninth century. It 
was made from the Hebrew by a Jew, for the benefit of the 
Jews ; it is printed in the London polyglot. Another of these 
Persian versions contains the four gospels : it was made from 
the Syriac version, and it is printed in the same polyglot, after a 
manuscript of Pocock's, which bears the date of 1314. The 
third version, which contains likewise the four gospels, is con- 
sidered to be more modern than the preceding. Wheloc, professor 
of Arabic in Cambridge, began to print it in 1652, but he having 
died two years alter, the work was continued by Pierson, who 
finished it in 1657. Although the editors considered that this 
version was made from the Greek, yet the learned Renaudot 
contends that it was made from the Syriac version. Walton 
mentions two Persian versions of the Psalms — one made by a 
Portuguese monk at Ispahan in 1618, and another by some 
Jesuits, from the Latin Vulgate. These are yet in manuscript. 
In conclusion we may observe, that the authority of St. Chry- 
sostom and Theodoret is adduced to prove that the scriptures 
were very anciently translated into the Persian language ; but it 
does not appear that any fragments of this ancient version are 
extant. The want of any Persic version of the Old Testament 
among the Christians of Persia, is thus accounted for by Eenau- 
dot — {Bissertatio in lihros S. Scrij). et cor urn versiones orient ales). 
The Persian Christians, for the most part, (he says) understand 
and read the Old Testament in Arabic ; and again, the liturgy 
is nowhere celebrated in Persian, but in Armenian, which all 
understand. 

IT. Of the Armenian version. — This is a very interesting 
version of the sacred scripture. It is ascribed by the Armenian 
writers to Aliesrob, who was minister of state and secretary to 
VTarasdates, and Arsaces the fourth, kings of Armenia, and con- 
temporaries with Theodosius the Second. This ^liesrob invented 
the Armenian alphabet. Before his time the Armenians used 
Svriac letters. He completed the translation of the scripture in 
the year 410 a.d. In the Old Testament he translated from the 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTEKES. 



127 



Septuagint — in the Xew, most probably from the original, and 
not from the Old (or Peschito) Syriac, as many have contended. 
The Peschito, however, was afterwards used in correcting the 
version ; and again, the Latin Yulgate was used also, in correct- 
ing the version, by Uscan— a bishop sent from Armenia to 
Amsterdam to superintend the printing of the Armenian scrip- 
tures. Of this printed edition, the Old Testament appeared in 
1666, and the New in 1668. A learned Armenian — Zohrab — 
not satisfied with the manner in which this edition had been 
executed, published at Venice in 1789 the New Testament, 
accompanied with some notes. This edition was reprinted in 
1816 without any change. But it was in 1805 that Zohrab 
brought out at Venice, in the house of the Lazarites, the great 
critical edition of the entire Armenian version, which he had 
undertaken. He collated for this work sixty-nine AISS., as he 
informs us in his preface ; he took for the basis of the edition 
that MS. which appeared to him to be the most ancient and the 
most correct — the faults which he discovered in it he corrected 
by means of the others ; he added in the margin all the various 
readings, a reference to the different MSS. which authorize them, 
and, in fine, some critical explanations, as often as he thought 
them necessary. — Glaire, Introduc. torn, i, p. 296. 



CHAPTER IX. 

OF THE GOTHIC AND SLAVONIC VERSIONS. 

I. Of. the Gothic version. — This version was made in the fifth 
century by TJlphilas, bishop of the Maeso-Goths, a German tribe 
that settled on the borders of the Greek empire. The version 
was made in the New Testament from the Greek, and in the Old 
from the Septuagint. With the exception of portions of this ver- 
sion which have been discovered in the Codices Rescripts, the 
only part that has come down to us is the four gospels, which are 
found, not without some chasms, however, in the Codex Argen- 
teus, a famous manuscript preserved in the library of the univer- 
sity at Upsal. This manuscript has its name from the silver 
letters with which it is written — the initial letters are golden. 
Some have supposed that this was the very manuscript written 
by TJlphilas, but this is disproved by its having marginal read- 
ings — a circumstance which indicates the existence of various 
copies of the version when this transcript was made. The part 
of the version contained in this manuscript has been several times 
published — the best edition is that by Zahn, in 1805. Frag- 
ments of the Epistle to the Honians, found by Xnittel in a codex 



128 



OF THE AXCIEXT VERSIONS 



rescriptus, have been also published. The illustrious Cardinal 
Mai — at that time Signor Angelo Mai — discovered in the Ambro- 
sian library at Milan several considerable portions of the Gothic 
version in various codices rescript!. These discoveries embrace 
several large portions of the J$ew Testament, besides a part of 
the books of Kings and Esclras. A specimen of these discoveries 
"was published by Signor Mai, assisted by Castillionei. This 
Gothic version has been always highly esteemed by critics, on 
account of its acknowledged antiquity. 

A few words here on what is meant by a codex rescriptus 
will not be considered out of place. By a codex rescriptus or 
palimpsestus, is meant a codex twice used by the copyist, in such 
a way that the first writing is not entirely effaced to make way 
for the second, but the first having faded or become dim from 
age, the second is written over it. Before the invention of paper, 
the great scarcity of parchment in different places induced many 
to use the same codex a second time, either erasing the first 
writing, to make way for some recent author who was in demand 
at the time, or simply writing over the first, as already men- 
tioned — in some instances both writings on these codices rescripti 
are legible. Several valuable remains of biblical and classical 
literature have been discovered in the first writing of these 
MSS. Xo one has enriched literature with such important dis- 
coveries of this kind as the illustrious Cardinal Mai. 

II. Of the Slavonic version. — The Slavonic, or old Eussian 
version, was made about the middle of the ninth century by 
Cyril and his brother Methodius, natives of Thessalonica, who 
preached the gospel to the Bulgarians and Moravians,- and in- 
vented the Slavonic alphabet. The translation comprehends the 
entire bible. In the Old Testament the Septuagint was followed 

in the Xew, the original. The translation is very literal — 

so far as to imitate the Greek construction. This version is 
much esteemed by critics, as it is found generally to agree with 
the most ancient MSS. It has been disputed whether this ver- 
sion was ever altered from the Latin Yulgate — Dobrowsky, pro- 
foundly acquainted with the Slavonic language, denies that it 
ever was ; yet the contrary has been re-asserted by Hug. The 
fundamental edition of this version is the one printed at Ostrog, 
in Bussia, 1581. Professor Alter's edition of the Greek testa- 
ment, 8vo., Vienna, 1787, is enriched with a number of accurate 
extracts from this version. 

Before concluding these observations on the ancient versions 
of the scripture, we may remark that it has been frequently 
necessarv for us to refer to polyglot editions of the bible. A 
polyglot' edition, as the name itself sufficiently indicates, is an 



OE THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



129 



edition of the bible in several languages. The most famous 
polyglots are, the Coraplutensian, brought out under the auspices 
of Cardinal Ximenes — the Paris polyglot, edited by Le Jay — 
and the London polyglot, of which Walton was the editor. 



DISSERTATION IX. 

OE THE PRINCIPAL MODERN VERSIONS OE THE SACRED SCRIPTURE. 



CHAPTER I. 

OF THE MODERN LATIN VERSIONS. 

It is not our intention to refer to all the modern translations of 
the sacred text, but merely to describe, as far as the limits of 
our work will permit, the principal versions that are in use. 
To begin with modern Latin versions, we first notice those which 
have been made by Catholics. 

First. Sanctes Pagninus, a Dominican, and a distinguished 
oriental scholar, was the first who published a new Latin trans- 
lation of the Old and JSTew Testaments. He translated from the 
Hebrew, and in the Xew Testament from the Greek. After 
twenty-five years of labour, he had the work printed at Lyons, 
in 1527, prefixing to it two briefs of the Popes — Adrian YI, 
and Clement YII, who authorised the printing of it. As Richard 
Simon observes, Pagninus cannot be charged with any want of 
deliberation in bringing out the work : the translation is literal, 
and is esteemed for its fidelity. Simon, however, takes the 
author to task for having departed so often from the old trans- 
lator. Pagninus does not appear to have been so well acquainted 
with the Greek as he was with the Hebrew : hence his transla- 
tion of the New Testament is not so much esteemed. 

Second. — Arias Montanus, a Spanish priest and a doctor in 
theology, gave a corrected edition of the version of Pagninus, at 
Antwerp, in 1572. Montanus improved upon the literal charac- 
ter of the version of Pagninus. He appears to have been more 
anxious to translate verbum verlo, than to bring out a connected 
sense in his version. His version, therefore, serves as a dictionary 
to the student of the Hebrew and Greek of the bible : hence 
it is that his version is printed interlinear in the London polyglot. 

Third. — In 1753, Houbigant, a priest of the oratory, pub- 
lished at Paris a Hebrew bible with a Latin version and notes, 

K 



130 



OF THE MOBERN VEESIOXS 



in four volumes folio. Houbigant has rendered his Latin ver- 
sion conformable to his edition of the Hebrew text, of which we 
have spoken in a preceding chapter. As to the books of the Old 
Testament, which are not found in the Hebrew, he translated 
these from the Greek. As Houbigant is commonly blamed for 
having taken too great a liberty in the correction of the Hebrew 
text, hence his Latin version is not much esteemed. At the 
same time, Benedict XIY honoured him with a brief and a 
medal. 

Fourth. — Veitenauer, a Jesuit, gave in 1768-1773 a trans- 
lation of the Old and Xew Testaments. In the Old Testament 
he translated from the Hebrew, and in the Xew from the Greek. 
According to Glaire {Introduction, torn. i, p. 299) the Latinity 
of this version is admired. 

Fifth. — For the Xew Testament, we may mention the cele- 
brated version by Erasmus. The first edition of it appeared in 
1516, and was dedicated to Pope Leo X. It has been since 
frequently reprinted. 

Sixth. — A new Latin translation of the [New Testament was 
published in the present century (London, 1817), by Leopoldo 
Sebastiani, who had been superior of the Catholic missions in 
Persia. According to the notice of this version in Horne, it 
appears that the learned translator went to immense trouble to 
secure every critical aid that was necessary, in order to give a 
faithful version conformable to the Alexandrian class of MSS. — 
Home's Introduction, vol. ii, part ii, p. 62, seventh edition. 

come now to the Latin translations of the bible made by 
Protestants, and we commence with that, First, of Sebastian 
Munster, who printed at Basil his translation of the Hebrew text 
of the Old Testament, in 1534. He gave a second edition of it 
in 1546, in which his Latin version is accompanied with the 
Hebrew text and some notes. Kichard Simon justly blames him 
for having yielded so implicitly to the guidance of the modern 
Jews in investigating the meaning of the Hebrew words — at the 
same time, Simon rather prefers the judgment of Huetius on 
this translator to that of GeDebrard, who accuses him of a want of 
exactness in consequence of his attachment to Luther. Huetius, 
on the other hand, is disposed to speak favourably of his learning 
and fidelity. 

Second. — The translation which bears the name of Leo Juda 
demands a brief notice. Leo Juda was a Zuinglian, who trans- 
lated the greater part of the Hebrew books of the Old Testament; 
the rest of these books, together with the Xew Testament, were 
translated by others, and the version was first printed at Zurich, in 
1543 ; it was afterwards, in 1545, reprinted at Paris by Robert 



OF THE SACKED SCRIPTURES. 



131 



Stephens, without the translator's name. He printed this ver- 
sion and the Vulgate in parallel columns, subjoining short notes 
or scholia : this is called Vatable' s bible, because these notes 
were printed by Stephens from a collection of manuscript notes 
dictated by that eminent Hebrew professor in his public lectures. 
Stephens, however, mixed up, occasionally, his own Calvinistic 
errors with the orthodox notes of Vatable, and hence the work 
was condemned by the Divines of Paris. Stephens attempted to 
defend it, but as Feller properly observes {J)ictionnaire Histo- 
rique, word Vatable,) his arguments were of as little value as his 
erroneous notes. The divines of Salamanca were permitted by 
the Spanish Inquisition to publish the work, after making the 
necessary changes in it ; they printed it in 1584, making, accord- 
ing to Simon, but very few changes. The style of this version 
is more elegant than that of Munster, but even Protestants allow 
that the translators have occasionally receded too far from the 
literal sense. 

Third. — Sebastian Castalio, or as he calls himself in his 
French works, Chateillon, is the author of a Latin version of the 
Old and New Testaments. The object which he proposed to 
himself was to render the originals in elegant classic Latin. 
This style of translating brought upon him the severe censure 
of the doctors of Geneva — at the head of whom was Beza. They 
taxed him with a want of fidelity in translating, and with a pro- 
faneness of style. Simon, at the same time, asserts, that Castalio 
was by no means deficient in the knowledge of the languages, in 
which he far surpassed any of the doctors of Geneva. However, 
he severely censures his manner of translating, which is pom- 
pous, inflated, and greivously deficient in that gravity and 
dignity which the subject required. Some idea may be formed 
of his manner of translating, from the first words of Genesis — 
Prineipio creavit Deus caelum et terrain, cum autem esset terra iners 
atque rudis tenebrisque off mum profundum et Divinus Spiritus sese 
super aquas libraret, jmsit Deus ut existeret lux, &c. Castalio' s 
version was frequently retouched by himself — it has gone through 
several editions. 

Fourth. — We come now to the version of the Old Testament 
made by Junius and Tremellius. This is a favourite version 
with Protestants : yet by some even of these, for example Dru- 
sius, the translators have been severely censured for the liberty 
which they took with their text. Richard Simon {Histoire Cri- 
tique de Vieux Testament,) points out various defects in the ver- 
sion ; the constant rendering of the Hebrew article by the 
demonstrative pronoun is condemned by him, as not having any 
solid foundation in the text. 



1S2 



OE THE JTODEEN VERSIONS 



Fifth.— John Augustus Dathe, professor of Hebrew at Leipsic, 
published a Latin translation of the Hebrew books of the Old 
Testament, which is held in high esteem by Protestants. It was 
originally brought out in detached octavo volumes, the last of 
which appeared in 1789. There have been several editions of it 
since. Glaire censures the translator for departing too much 
from the letter of the text. 

Sixth. — Finally, we shall notice the Latin version of the New 
Testament made by Theodore Beza. This version was first 
printed in 1556; it has been repeatedly printed since. This 
version is highly esteemed by Protestants generally, and it is an 
undoubted fact that the opinions of its author, and his renderings 
of the text of the New Testament, have exercised a great influence 
on the translators of what is called the English authorised ver- 
sion : this is made manifest by Ward in his history of the errata 
of the Protestant bible. Now Beza has been at all times 
denounced by Catholics as an unscrupulous translator, who often 
departs from the received reading without necessity, and, some- 
times, without any authority whatever, interpolates the sacred 
text at pleasure : and some of the most learned Protestants have 
subscribed to the justice of this censure — we may refer, among 
others, to Walton and to MacXnight, who in his general preface 
to his translation of the Epistles (vol. i, p. 6,) after some other 
observations, not very complimentary to Beza, says: " Nor is 
this all ; he hath mistranslated a number of texts for the pur- 
pose, as it would seem, of establishing his peculiar doctrines, and 
of confuting his opponents: of all which, examples shall be 
given afterwards. Farther, by omitting some of the original 
words, and by adding others without any necessity, he hath in 
his translation perverted, or, at least, darkened some passages ; 
so that, to speak impartially, his translation is neither literal, nor 
faithful, nor perspicuous. Nevertheless {observe), Beza having 
acquired great fame, both as a linguist and a divine, the learned 
men who afterwards translated the New Testament, for the use 
of the reformed churches, were too much swayed by his opinions." 
What a noble character is here given of Beza as a" translator, and 
that by a friend ! 



CHAPTEE II. 

OE THE ENGLISH VEESIOXS. 

And first — of those made by Catholics. We shall not dwell 
upon the versions either of the entire scriptures, or of portions of 
them, which were made in England before the change of religion 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



133 



which took place at the period of the Reformation : some of these 
were in Saxon, others in English. Yenerable Bede translated 
the entire scriptures into Saxon, for the use of his countrymen, 
in the early part of the eighth century ; the other ancient ver- 
sions were made at various periods. But to proceed at once to 
the modern versions. The modern Catholic version of the entire 
scriptures is that one which is named the Rhemish and Douay 
version. The Kew Testament was published at the English 
college at Rheims, in 1582. The Old Testament was published 
at the English college at Douay in 1609 and 1610, in two 
volumes quarto. Both the Old and New Testaments were 
translated at Rheims by Dr. Gregory Martin, who was assisted 
by William (afterwards Cardinal) Allen, Dr. Richard Bristow, 
and Dr. "William Reynolds ; these were rather re visors than 
joint translators with Gregory Martin. The version was made 
from the Latin Vulgate, and was accompanied with rather 
copious notes both on the New and the Old Testaments. The 
notes on the New Testament were from the pen of Dr. Richard 
Bristow ; those on the Old Testament were written by Dr. 
Thomas Worthington. — See Dod's Ecclesiastical History of 
England, folio edition, vol. ii, p. 121. Gregory Martin, the 
translator, was educated at St. John's College, Oxford ; he after- 
wards became tutor in the family of the Duke of Norfolk : at 
this time he had not publicly professed the Catholic faith, 
although secretly attached to it. After publicly professing his 
adhesion to the Catholic religion, he went to the English college 
at Rheims, where he was much distinguished for zeal and 
learning. In proof of his qualifications for his task as a trans- 
lator of the scripture, we may refer with Dod {ubi supra) to the 
words addressed to the Duke of Norfolk, when that nobleman 
visited St. John's College, Oxford. The speaker upon that 
occasion thought fit to allude to Gregory Martin, who was then 
in his grace's family, in these words : " Habes, illustrissime dux, 
HebraBum nostrum, Grascum nostrum, decuset gloriam nostram." 
This translation was made before the correction of the Vulgate 
under Sixtus V and Clement VIII ; yet the differences between 
this version, as it came from the hands of the translator, and 
the present Latin Vulgate, are so few and inconsiderable, that 
he (the translator) must have followed a very correct Latin 
edition. 

In the year 1750, an edition, in which the phraseology was 
modernized, the notes abridged, and in some instances consider- 
ably altered, was published in London, under Dr. Challoner's 
inspection : this is the Douay bible now current among the 
Catholics of these countries. 



134 



Or THE MODERN VEESIOXS 



An English translation of the iSew Testament was made by 
our distinguished countryman Cornelius jS'ary. This learned 
priest was a native of the county of Kildare — a doctor of laws 
of the University of Paris, and for many years parish priest of 
St. Michan's parish in the city of Dublin, where he died, in 
1738. He was the author of several learned works. He trans- 
lated the New Testament from the Latin Yulgate, compared with 
the original Greek and several translations in the vulgar tongues. 
According to Erennan, in his Ecclesiastical History of Ireland, 
(Yol. ii, p. 343,) it was published in London in 1705, octavo. 
Horne mentions it as appearing in 1718-19, octavo, without the 
name of the place or printer, but he quotes Dr. Geddes for the 
statement that it was printed at Dublin. (Horne, Introduction, 
vol. ii, part ii, p. 85, seventh edition.) 

A translation of the Xew Testament, published at Douay in 
1730, 2 \ols. octavo, by Dr. Witham, deserves to be noticed. 
The translation was made from the Yulgate, which the learned 
translator diligently compared with the Greek. That he was a 
perfect master of the Greek tongue appears sufficiently manifest 
from the learned and useful, although concise, notes with which 
the work is enriched. 

"We proceed now to give some account of the English versions 
made by Protestants. And this may be the most appropriate 
place to observe that the Heresiarch Wickliffe translated the 
bible, about the year 1380, into the English of that time. He 
translated from the Yulgate, not being acquainted with the 
Hebrew and Greek. 

The first printed English translation of the scriptures was 
made by William Tindal, He printed the Xew Testament at 
Antwerp or Hamburg, without a name, in the year 1526. 
Horne seems to think that he translated from the original Greek. 
Eespeeting the portions of the Old Testament which he trans- 
lated, Horne thinks it probable that, as he had little or no skill 
in the Hebrew, he translated from the Latin. The bishop of 
London was very active in preventing the circulation of Tindal's 
translation. Sir Thomas More, in a work written against Tindal, 
exposed the numerous corruptions which he had made of the 
text. Among the parts of the Old Testament translated by 
Tindal are the five books of Moses, and in translating these he was 
assisted by Miles Coverdale. 

This same Miles Coverdale, who was promoted to the see of 
Exeter, by Edward YI, made a translation of the entire scrip- 
ture, which he published in 1535. This was the first whole 
bible printed in English, and the first allowed by royal authority. 
An edition of it, revised by Matthew Parker, was printed in 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



135 



1562 for the use of the church, until another would be pre- 
pared. 

In 1560 a translation of the whole bible, except the deutero- 
canonical parts of the Old Testament, was brought out at 
Geneva, in 4to. The translators were, principally, Coverdale 
above mentioned, Gilby, and Whittinghani ; — some reckon John 
Knox among the number. One thing is certain, that they were 
all rigid Calvinists. 

In 1568 a new translation was brought out by Matthew 
Parker. It was undertaken by command of Elizabeth, and there 
having been eight bishops among the translators, it was called 
the bishop's bible. " This translation," says Horne, " was used 
in churches for forty years, although the Geneva bible was more 
read in private houses." — Introduction, vol. ii. 

We come now to King James's bible : but first a few words 
on the before-mentioned Protestant translations. That they were 
full of gross errors no unprejudiced Protestant even, will now 
deny ; and that these errors were wilful, Ward, in his Errata, 
satisfactorily proves. At all events, one thing appears quite 
clear — that the progress of what is called the Reformation in 
England is to be ascribed, in a very great degree, to the corrup- 
tions of these early versions. The cry of the first reformers ! 
was <l abandon this church — search the scriptures, examine for 
yourselves God's own word ; prove all things — hold fast what is 
right — try this church by the scriptures — here they are in your 
own language — in them you will see her errors, and vain pre- 
tensions." Well, after this, did they give the people a true 
version of the scriptures ? Ear from it. The present Protestant 
authorised version is a standing proof, that even the authors of 
it considered the previous translations to abound with number- 
less and gross errors. Let us take one or two classes of corrup- 
tions — among the many pointed out by Ward — to show how the 
people were imposed upon. The first class which we shall 
adduce is the omission of the word church, and the substitution 
of congregation for it, throughout, in the editions of the first 
English Protestant bible. See Dr. Lingard's edition of Ward's 
immortal work, The Errata of the Protestant Bible. See this 
author particularly in the article, " Protestant translations against 
the Church" where he observes that, ''in the English transla- 
tion of 1562, they so totally suppressed the word church that it 
is not once to be found in all that bible, so long read in their 
congregations." This has been corrected in the authorised. 
The mischievous effect of this mode of translating s%xA?j(7/a on 
the minds of the people, may be easily conceived. The fear of 
the particular congregation to which each one belonged, was 



136 



OF THE MODERN VEBSIONS 



substituted for the fear of the church, which, up to this time, 
had a powerful effect in keeping the people within the limits of 
their duty. The other class of corruptions which we shall notice 
is that which embraces the translations of the words siduXov, 
eidwXoXargris, eidoXoXarPsia, which, in the early English bibles 
(see Ward), were image, worshipper of images, worshipping of 
images. Everyone sees how they would turn to account this 
corruption of the scripture. They accused the Catholic church 
of idolatry on account of its doctrine and practice with respect 
to sacred images, and they adduced the texts which they had 
thus corrupted as justifying the accusation. Two texts, as Dr. 
Lingard observes {Preface to his edition of Ward? 8 Errata), proved 
eminently useful to them : the first, from 2 Corinthians, vi, 16, 
where the apostle was made to say — " How agreeth the temple 
of God with images ? " whereas, the apostle, as is evident from 
the context, is there speaking of pagan idols, and hence the 
authorised has idols ; but when the authorised was made the other 
translation had gained its end, which was to excite the people to 
pull down the images, and remove all such things from the 
churches. Another text was that of St. John, 1st Epistle, v 21 ; 
— "My little children keep yourself from idols," as we have it 
properly translated ; they translated it — " Babes, keep yourselves 
from images." It is corrected in the authorised ; but in its time 
it served as a very appropriate auxiliary to the foregoing' text : 
for, after the churches had been stript of all their Catholic orna- 
ments, this text was printed in large letters within the door, as 
a security against any of these ornaments being brought back. 
The effects which these and such like perversions of the scrip- 
ture produced on the minds of the infatuated multitude, may be 
learned from Ward. 

"We shall now come to the history of King James's bible, or 
the authorised English Protestant version, as it is called. In 
the year 1604, in consequence of the many objections which 
were made to the Bishops' bible, King James ordered a new ver- 
sion to be undertaken, and for this purpose fifty-four translators 
were appointed, but it appears that only forty-seven were forth- 
coming when the work commenced, which was in 1607. — Home's 
Introduction, vol. ii, part ii, p. 73, seventh edition. The transla- 
tors were divided into six companies, two of which met at West- 
minster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge. The whole 
work was then divided into six portions, and one portion assigned 
to each company, each member of which was to translate the 
whole portion. When a company had agreed about a book, it was 
sent to each of the other companies to be revised. At the end of 
about three years (we continue to state these things on the 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



137 



authority of Home, ubi supra,) a committee of six assembled in 
London, to revise the whole work, two having been deputed 
from the companies at Oxford, two from those at Westminster, 
and two from those at Cambridge. It was lastly revised by Dr. 
Smith (afterwards Protestant bishop of Gloucester,) who wrote 
the preface, and Dr. Bilson, Protestant bishop of Winchester. 
This translation was first published in 1611. It is declared in 
the title that it was made from the original tongues, and by the 
king's special command. Different revisions have been made of 
this version since 1611. There was one given by Dr. Scatter- 
good in 1683, which appears to be the edition to which Ward 
refers in his Errata. Before concluding this brief notice of the 
history of this version, we may mention some of the orders which 
were given to the translators by James before commencing their 
task, and to which orders they were bound tamely to submit, no 
matter what their own sentiments might be on the points to 
which these referred. The first was ''that the ordinary bible 
read in the church, commonly called the Bishops' bible, should 
be followed and as little altered as the original would permit." 
Second — " that the names of the prophets and the holy writers 
with the other names in the text should be retained as near as 
might be, according as they were vulgarly used." Third — " that 
the old ecclesiastical words should be kept, as, for example, the 
word church, not to be translated congregation." The other rules 
we omit, but we shall make a few observations on the three here 
cited. Prom the first rule we learn that the Bishop's bible with 
all its imperfections was to be preserved, unless where those 
copies of the original scriptures to which the translators could 
then have access, rendered a change necessary. 

The second rule exercised an important influence upon the 
English orthography of scripture names of persons and places. 
Whether from a wish to be unlike the church which they, had 
abandoned, even in this slight matter, or from an anxiety to 
exhibit their acquaintance with the Hebrew text, the first Pe- 
formers, in their translations of the bible, rejected the estab- 
lished orthography of the scripture names, substituting for it 
another, which was modelled upon the Alasoretic reading of the 
Hebrew text. Hence has arisen such a frequent discrepancy 
between Catholic and Protestant bibles — and of course between 
Catholic and Protestant writers — in the spelling of these 
names. The Catholic will say Eli as, Eli sens, Sion, whilst 
the Protestant, following his bible, will say Elijah, Elisha, Zion, 
and so of a vast number of names of persons and places. The 
Catholic orthography has been derived from the Septuagint 
version, and has prevailed in the church from the very beginning, 



138 



OE THE MODERN VERSIONS 



in all those places to which the influence of the Septuagint ex- 
tended ; and since the influence of that version extended to 
almost the entire Christian church, in the commencenient, in 
such a way, that the church read the scriptures either in the 
Septuagint or in versions made from it : hence it is that our 
orthography of these names may be properly styled Catholic. St. 
Jerome, although so well acquainted with the pronunciation of 
the Hebrew text, did not think it advisable to change the names 
to which the people were accustomed, and which were recommen- 
ded by a well-established usage, and the venerable authority of the 
Seventy. But the Reformers undertook to reform many things, 
both great and small, and among the rest, the prevalent ortho- 
graphy of these scripture names. However, James, although no 
one ever charged him with having a superabundance of good sense, 
had still sense enough to perceive that if the principle of the 
Reformers, in this particular were fully carried out, it would 
make their translation ridiculous in the eyes of the people, who 
perhaps, would be even provoked to laughter at hearing of the 
five books of Mos/ieh, the strength of Shimshon, or the wisdom of 
Shelomoh. 2s"ow the translators, as far as the principle which 
guided them in this matter was concerned, had just the same 
right and no more to change Elias into Eli] ah, and Josaphat 
into Jehoshaphat, that they had to change ^Moses into Mosheh, 
Sampson into Shimshon, or Solomon into Shelomoh : but the 
reader now understands why James thought fit to limit the opera- 
tion of their principle. 

As to the third rule laid down by James for the government 
of the translators, it is easy to perceive why the king takes care 
that they shall not say congregation in place of church. James, 
who, as it appears, thought more of his ecclesiastical headship 
than of his temporal dignity, had no fancy to be called the head 
of a congregation, but, by all means, the head of a church. 
]Now, if the word church had not been found in the scripture, 
the people might have imagined that there was no such thing as 
a church, whereof any one could be the head. Moreover, the 
word congregation had already served its purpose, which was to 
keep away the fear of the ancient church, whilst their new 
church that had now arrived to maturity, was in its tender in- 
fancy. And perhaps the king — who was looked upon as a 
shrewd genius, at least by himself — might have imagined that 
congregation could only designate a church in its infancy, as if 
congregation bore the same relation to church that child does to 
man. 

Having thus briefly noticed the history of this version, it is 
necessary to say a few words on the character of a translation 



OF THE SACKED SCEIPTTJEES. 



139 



which is so highly extolled by those who decry the Latin Vul- 
gate — our authorised version. Richard Simon, who, in the 
judgment of Protestants, is generally allowed to have been an 
impartial critic, says, with reference to the Old Testament, 
where the translation was made from the Hebrew, that this ver- 
sion has its defects as well as the others, i. e. the preceding 
English Protestant versions ; assigning as his reason, in the first 
place, that the translators took for their guide the ordinary 
system of Jewish grammar. — Simon Histoire Critique Du Vieux 
Testament, liv. ii, chap, xxiii. He here evidently implies that 
St. Jerome had an advantage — in this particular — that he trans- 
lated at a period anterior to the fixing of the ITasoretic text, or 
the systematizing of the Hebrew grammar in its present rabbini- 
cal form ; for, although these labours of the rabbins have been 
attended with several advantages, yet it will hardly at present 
be asserted by any one, that they are not calculated to lead their 
servile followers into mistakes in rendering the scripture text. 
Simon makes another observation in the same place, which 
although favourable to this version as compared with the other 
English Protestant versions, yet redounds to the still greater 
honour of the Yulgate— he says, " That which has made it more 
exact in some places than the preceding (English Protestant 
versions) is this — that those who were engaged in it had pro- 
fited by the critical observations of Drusius — and they took care 
not to fall into the errors which this learned Protestant had 
condemned in the version of Treinellius." Now it is well known 
that the principal objection urged by Drusius against the version 
of Tremellius was the fact of that translator's having departed 
so much from the Yulgate. As to this version, in the New Tes- 
tament — this, in the first place, may be urged against it, that 
having been made upon the common Greek text, it cannot bear 
a comparison with the Yulgate, which not only represents a 
more ancient Greek text, but also, in the judgment even of the 
most learned Protestant critics, a different and much superior 
recension of that text. As we have observed before, when 
treating of the recensions or families of the MSS. of the Greek 
Testament — the common Greek text (which has been followed 
in King James's bible) belongs to the Constantinopolitan family 
or recension ; whereas our Yulgate represents the Alexandrian 
recension, which, as I have just observed, is, in the opinion of 
the most learned critics even among the Protestants, a much 
more ancient and a much superior recension of the Greek text. 
Indeed this version has been far from winning the approbation 
of all Protestant critics, as appears by these words of Home — he 
speaks, of course, of Protestants in the following passage : "of 



140 



OF THE MODEBN VERSIONS 



late years, however, this admirable version — the guide and 
solace of the sincere Christian — has been attacked with no com- 
mon virulence, and arraigned as being deficient in fidelity, per- 
spicuity, and elegance : ambiguous and incorrect even in matters 
of the highest importance." — Home's Introduc. Bibliographical 
Appendix to vol. 2. And Mac-Knight, a great Protestant 
authority, says, in the General Preface to his Translation of the 
Epistles, " Even that which is called the king's translation, 

though in general much better than the rest is not a little 

faulty. It is by no means such a just representation of the in- 
spired originals as merits to be implicitly relied on for deter- 
mining the controverted articles of the Christian faith, and for 
quieting the dissensions which have rent the church." In 
Ward's learned work on the errata of the Protestant bible, to 
which we beg to refer the reader, the leading mistranslations in 
this version, are well pointed out and exposed. He shows there 
that the influence of Beza's opinions on this version was such as 
would alone be sufficient to condemn it. — See Ward's Errata, 
Lublin edition, 1810, 4to, p. 71. As to the character of Beza's 
translation of the New Testament, which had such weight with 
King James' translators, we shall repeat again the words of Doc- 
tor MacXnight — himself a follower, at least very generally, of 
the theological opinions of Beza. As before observed, therefore, 
in the general preface to his translation of the Epistles, p. 6, he 
says, lk Nor is this all ; he (Beza) hath mistranslated a number of 
texts,* for the purpose, as it would seem, of establishing his 
peculiar doctrines, and of confuting his opponents : of all which, 
examples shall be given afterwards. Partner, by omitting some 
of the original words, and by adding others, without any neces- 
sity, he hath in his translation, perverted, or at least darkened, 
some passages ; so that to speak impartially, his translation is 
neither literal, nor faithful, nor perspicuous. Nevertheless, Beza 
having acquired great fame, both as a linguist and a divine, the 
learned men who afterwards translated the New Testament for 
the use of the reformed churches, were too much swayed by his 
opinions." We have said enough to show that Catholics do not 
stand alone when they pronounce this version to be an unsafe 
guide to the knowledge of that original, which it so frequently 
misrepresents. 



01 THE SACltED SCRIPTURES. 141 



CHAPTER III. 

0E THE GERMAN AKD FRENCH VERSIONS. 

I. Of the German Versions. — A translation of the bible, in the 
German language, was printed at a very early period — the 
oldest editions of it are without a date. The first of which the 
date is certainly known was printed at Augsbourg, in 1477. 
Many editions of it were afterwards printed at Nuremberg, and 
at Augsbourg. The translation given in these editions was 
made on the Yulgate, and published thus often beibre the 
birth of Protestantism. — See Boerner's Le Long, torn, ii, in 
Biblia Germanica Catholicor um ; and Dublin Review, vol. i, p. 319. 

Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism, was the first 
who attempted to translate the scriptures into German from the 
original text. Luther finished his translation of the bible about 
the year 1532. This translation was received with great ap- 
plause, and has been always held in high esteem by the follow- 
ers of Luther's doctrine in Germany. It became the basis of 
various other translations made by Protestants into the lan- 
guages of the northern countries of Europe. Luther's great 
object appears to have been, to make the style of his translation 
find favour with his readers for its purity and elegance. In 
aiming at this object, he has taken much too great a licence with 
the text, even in the opinion of the most learned Protestants. 
Thus Leusden and Aldegondius, quoted by Le Long, (edition by 
Boerner,) torn, i, p. 278, de Bibliis Belgicis Calvinistarum. 
Leusden says of Luther's version, " multis scatuit vitiis," and 
Aldegondius — "Inter omnes autem omnium veiviones ego inge- 
nue fatebor, mihi visam esse nullam tanto abesse ab Hebr. — 
veritate intervallo atque sit Lutheri versio." See an able cri- 
tique of Luther's JSTew Testament, Dublin Eeview, vol. i, p. 386. 
Indeed Luther was but imperfectly acquainted with the original 
languages of the scripture : that we are not over severe in repre- 
hending this version will be manifest to anyone who will take 
the trouble of reading the learned critique of Father Simon on 
Luther's bible, contained in his critical history of the Old and 
JS"ew Testament. The Synod of Dort ordered a new version of 
the scripture to be made from the original, because the Dutch 
version of the scriptures then in use among the adherents of that 
synod had been made from Luther's bible, which the synod con- 
sidered to be replete with faults. John Piscator, a Calvinist, 



142 



OF THE MOBERX VERSIONS 



gave a translation of the bible into German in 1604, made from 
the Latin version of Junius and Tremellius, and various other 
translations of the bible into German have been made by Pro- 
testants. Cabinet, Dictionarium Biblicum, V. BiUia. Among 
others, John David ALichaelis and De Wette have distinguished 
themselves as translators of the scripture — but of all these Pro- 
testant translations it must be said, that a love of novelty and a 
licentious criticism have disfigured them with numerous errors. 
The German Jews have also their translations of the Old Testa- 
ment, some printed in the Hebrew character, some in the Ger- 
man character. These versions are remarkable for an over literal 
following of the Hebrew text. 

We have already seen that there was a German Catholic ver- 
sion of the scriptures before that Luther had broached his errors 
— -and since the publication of Luther's bible, there have been 
various German translations made by Catholics. Pirst, that of 
John Dietemberger, first published at Mayence in 1534. Second, 
the translation called by the name of Eckius' bible, — although 
Eckius translated only the Old Testament ; the i\ T ew Testament 
was translated by Eraser. It was first published in 1537, and, 
as well as the preceding, has been often reprinted. Third, the 
version of TJlenberg, first published in 1630, at Cologne. It was 
received with great applause by the Catholics of Germany, and 
has been often reprinted. In all these Catholic versions, the 
Yulgate has been the basis of the translation. Ulenberg's ver- 
sion was made from the Sixtine edition of the Yulgate. — Le Long, 
edition by Boerner, torn, ii, De Bibliis Germanicis Impressis. 
Besides these three versions which contain the Old and ^ T ew 
Testaments, we might specify other German translations both of 
the Old and I^ew Testaments made by Catholics. The names of 
the translators may be seen in Glaire. We pass on now to notice 
the principal. 

II. French versions. — The most ancient Prench translation 
of the bible, of which we have any certain knowledge, is that 
made by Peter "VTaldensis, or de Yaux, head of the Waldensian 
or Yaudois heretics. It is not known whether any copy of this 
version has come down to our times. Of the Prench versions 
which have issued from the press, the earliest is that made by 
Guyard des ]Moulins, a priest, about the year 1294. It was 
printed in Paris in 1488, two volumes, in folio. It is the first 
Catholic Prench version, and was printed before the Reforma- 
tion. James Le Pevre, of Estaples — better known by the name 
of Paber Stapulensis — published a new translation of the whole 
scripture, from the Latin into Prench, Paris, 1528. This ver- 



OE THE SACEED SCRIPTURES. 



143 



sion was often reprinted since, in different cities of Prance. A 
French -version of the sacred scripture was published in the year 
1643, at Paris, by James Corbin, which translation he made by 
the order of Lewis XIII. It is not much esteemed by reason of 
its barbarous style, the translator having servilely imitated the 
Latin phraseology. A French version of the bible, better known 
than the preceding, is that made from the Yulgate by Le 
Maistre De Sacy, a priest of Port Royal, published in Paris in 
1612, 32 vols, in 8vo., accompanied with explanations of the 
spiritual and literal sense, which, for the most part, were not 
written by De Sacy, but by Du Fosse, Hure, and Le Tourneur. 
Glaire remarks, that the names of Du Fosse, Hure, and Le 
Tourneur, are sufficient to put one on his guard in reading these 
explanations in De Sacy's bible, which in effect, in more than 
one place, favour the errors of Jansenius. — Introduction, torn, i, 
Section Des Versions Franqaises. The French version of De 
Sacy, revised iu some places, is that which Dom. Calmet has 
employed in his well-known commentary on the literal sense of 
the scripture. 

We may here remark on some versions which embrace only 
the New Testament— First, Father Amelotte published a French 
version of the New Testament with notes, in 1666-1670, 3 vols. 
8vo. Amelotte has the character of a faithful translator, but 
his style is not admired for its elegance. Second, another French 
version of the New Testament is that made from the Yulgate 
by Father Bouhours, 2 vols. 12mo. Paris, 1697-1703. Bou- 
hours was assisted in the work by two other Jesuits, Letellier 
and Besnier. The style of this version is considered a little 
deficient in perspicuity. Third, we may also mention the 
French Testament of Godeau, which holds a middle place be- 
tween a literal version and a paraphrase. We cannot pass by 
without notice a French version of the New Testament which 
has obtained great notoriety ; it is that which is called the New 
Testament of Mons. It was published in the year 1665, with 
the permission of the archbishop of Cambray, and the privilege 
of the king of Spain. It is called the New Testament of Mons, 
because it is declared in the title page, that it was printed by 
Gaspar Migeot of Mons. In reality, however, it was printed at 
Amsterdam, by the Elzevirs. Three were engaged in the trans- . 
ration — Anthony Le Maistre, Anthony Arnauld, and Isaac Le 
Maistre de Sacy. De Sacy composed the preface, assisted by 
Pe.ter Nicole and Claude a Sainte Marthe. In the privilege, 
however, granted for the printing of the work, where it is said 
to have been made by a certain doctor of the Sorbonne, Arnauld 
alone is named. This version was condemned in 1668 by 



144 



OF THE MODERN VERSIONS 



Clement IX, and in 1679 by Innocent XI. The French text, 
to which Quesnel appended his Reflections, is, in a great part, 
taken from this version of Mons. 

French translations of the scripture have been also made by 
the Protestants. The first French version published by the 
Protestants is that made by Robert Peter Olivetan, a relative of 
Calvin's, by whom he was assisted in the work. It was first 
printed at Xeufchatel, in folio, 1535. Olivetan copied exten- 
sively from the French version, which had been made by Xicholas 
de Leuse, a doctor of Louvain, and which had been printed at 
Antwerp by Martin L'Emperenr, in 1534. Olivetan himself 
was badly fitted for the work, being but imperfectly acquainted 
with the French idiom, whilst of the original language of the 
Old, as well as the Xew Testament, he had hardly any know- 
ledge. — See Richard Simon Historie Critique cles Versions du 
Nouveau Testament, Rotterdam edit. p. 329. An edition of this 
bible was published in 1588 at Geneva. It was revised by 
Beza and others : it is much more esteemed by Protestants, than 
the early editions of Olivetan, and it goes by the name of the 
Geneva bible. Sebastian Castalio, or Chateillon, has given a 
version of the Old and Xew Testament from the Hebrew and 
Greek, which he published at Basil, in 1555. — Calmet, Diction. 
Bibli. V. Billia. He was so imperfectly acquainted with the 
French language that his version was never held in any esteem 
even by the Protestants. John Diodati, the same who gave the 
Italian version, which bears his name, published also a French 
version of the scripture, made from the Hebrew and Greek, 
Geneva, 1644. As to translations restricted to the Xew Testa- 
ment, the most remarkable made by the Protestants are — First, 
The translation of the Xew Testament, by the celebrated critic, 
Le Clerc, published at Amsterdam, 2 vols. 4to, 1703. It never 
met with any general approbation among the Protestants, on 
account of the Socinian principles with which it is tainted. 
Second, The French version, made by Beausobre and L' Enfant, 
and published at Amsterdam in 1718. This version is in great 
repute with Protestants. — See Janssens' Hermemutica Sacra, 
French translation, torn, ii, p. 280-6. 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



145 



CHAPTER IY. 

OF THE BELGIAN, ITALIAN, SPANISH, AND PORTUGUESE VERSIONS. 

I. Belgian versions of the scripture are very ancient, and were 
often issued from the press before the origin of the so-called 
Reformation, as may be seen in Le Long. — BMiotheca Sacra, 
torn, ii, Be Bibliis Belgicis Lnpressis. All these versions, or 
editions, wanted the name of the translator up to the year 
1548, when the version of Nicholas Van Winghe was printed 
at Louvain and Cologne. We are here to be understood as speak- 
ing of the entire bible, for we have the New Testament, trans- 
lated by Cornelius Hendrickz, Delft, 1524. Yan Winghe informs 
us, that he was assisted in making his versions by two Louvain 
doctors, whose names, however, he does not mention : this version 
has been often reprinted since. There were other Belgian 
versions made by the Catholics in the seventeenth century. The 
Belgian Protestants, before the year 1636, made use of a ver- 
sion of the scripture in their language, taken from the Ger- 
man version of Luther. The Synod of Dort, however, which 
held its sittings in the years 1618 and 1619, ordered a new 
version to be made from the originals, and deputed certain per- 
sons for this purpose. The version was given to the public in 
1636 and 1637, and has often been reprinted. 

II. Italian versions. — The most ancient of these with which 
we are acquainted is that of j^icholis Alalermi, a Cainaldulese 
monk, who made it from the Yulgate : it was printed at Yenice 
in 1471, in 2 vols. Another Italian version was made from the 
original languages by Anthony Bruccioli, and published at 
Yenice in 1532. Richard Simon informs us, that he had but a 
middling knowledge of the Hebrew. — Historie Critique du Vieux 
Testament, liv, ii. cap. 22. His translation was put on the index 
by the order of the Council of Trent. Sanctes Maroiochini 
gave a corrected edition of Bruccioli' s version. This might be 
almost considered a new version : it was printed at Yenice in 
1538, and it has been often since reprinted. In fine, the Italian 
version at present in use in Italy is that made by Anthony 
Martini, archbishop of Florence : it was made from the Yulgate. 
The New Testament was published at Turin, 1769, and the Old 
Testament in 1779. This version received the sanction of 
Pius YI, and has been repeatedly printed. It is accompanied 
with excellent explanatory notes. 

L 



146 



OF THE ]y;0"DERIs T YEESIOITS 



The Protestants, also, have their Italian bibles. First they 
gave an edition of the scripture in Italian, at Geneva, 1562, 
which was not a new version, but taken from former versions 
which they accommodated to their views. They principally 
followed, at least in the Old Testament, the version of Eruccioii. 
Diodati published his Italian version of the bible first in 1607, and 
again 1641. — Calmet, Dietionar. Y. Biblia. This version is 
much esteemed by Protestants. Calmet, observes that in the 
same way as in his French bible, Diodati has rather given a 
paraphrase than a version in the strict sense. Diodati' s Protes- 
tant views appear in his translation. 

III. Spanish versions. — The first Spanish version of the 
bible of which we have an account, is that which was made in 
the dialect of Valencia, and printed in the city of Yalencia in 
1478, or, according to others, 1500. Cyprian de Yalera, a 
Protestant, testifies that he saw this version — it is also mentioned 
by others. See Calmet, Dictionar. V. Biblia, also Le Long, by 
Poerner, torn, ii, p. 145. It was made from the Yulgate — the 
author of it is not. known. Passing over various Catholic versions 
of certain portions of the scripture, we come to the Spanish 
version of the entire bible, made from the Yulgate, by Don 
Felipe Scio de San Miguel. It was published at Madrid, in 
1793-4, in ten folio volumes. Two other editions at least, of 
this version, have been since published at Madrid. The trans- 
lation is accompanied with copious notes. The author of this 
version was rewarded with the See of Segovia. 

A Protestant version of the scriptures in the Spanish lan- 
guage was given by Cassiodorus de Eeyna, at Basil, 1569. In 
translating the Old Testament he followed almost entirely the 
Latin version of Santes Pagninus. A revised edition of this 
version was afterwards given by Cyprian de Yalera, also a Pro- 
testant. It was printed at Amsterdam, in 1602. We may also 
mention here a Protestant version of the JS^ew Testament in the 
dialect of Castile, made from the Greek by Francis Enzinas (other- 
wise Driander), and dedicated to the Emperor Charles V, Ant- 
werp, 1543. The Jews had from an early period a Spanish ver- 
sion oi the Old Testament, made from the Hebrew — of this version 
the Pentateuch was published at Constantinople, in 1546. This 
ancient version has been attributed by some, but without suffi- 
cient foundation, to Rabbi David Kimchi, the celebrated Jewish 
doctor, who flourished in the thirteenth century. See Calmet, 
Diction. V. Biblia. In 1553 a Spanish version of the Old Testa- 
ment, or rather, perhaps, a revised edition of the old version, 
was published by the Jews at Ferrara. A revised edition of the 
Ferrara bible was published at Amsterdam, by Manasseh Ben 



OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



147 



Israel, in 1630. An edition of the Old Testament, in Hebrew 
and Spanish, was printed at Vienna, in the years 1813, 14, 15, 
and 16, in four volumes, 4to., for the use of the Jews of Constan- 
tinople and of most of the cities of Turkey, who are Spanish Jews. 

IV. Portuguese versions. — A Catholic version of the scripture 
in the Portuguese language, made by Antonio Pereira, was prin- 
ted at Lisbon, in 1781-3. As early, however, as the reign of 
John the Pirst, the historian, Emanuel Sousa, (quoted in the 
Dublin Review, vol. i, p. 384,) tells us, that the JNew Testament 
had been translated into that language. A Protestant version of 
the New Testament in this language was published in 4to., at 
Amsterdam, in 1681. And a Protestant version of the Old 
Testament, executed by Ferreira D'Almeida and Jacob op den 
Akker, was published at Batavia, in 1748-53, 2 vols. 8vo. 



CHAPTER V. 

OF THE POLISH, BOHEMIAN, SCLAVONIC, ICELANDIC, AND 
OTHER MODERN VERSIONS. 

The first Polish version was made by the order of S. Hedwige, 
queen of Pcland. This version was made about the year 1390. 
At a later period the bible was translated from the Latin into 
Polish, by the command of Pope Gregory XIII, and published 
with the approbation of Clement VIII at Cracow, in 1599. 
Another Polish Catholic version, viz. that of Jerome Leopoli- 
tanus, was published in 1608. And again the bible was trans- 
lated into the Polish by Justus Ilabi, a Jesuit, and printed in 
1657. — Le Long, edition by Poerner, torn, ii, p. 353. There is 
also a Protestant version of the bible in the Polish language, 
made from Luther's German translation, and published in 1596. 
The bible was translated into the Bohemian language at an early 
period. The entire bible, in that language, was printed at 
Prague in 1488, at Cutna in 1498, and at Venice in 1506 a ad 
1511 ; all these editions were prior to the commencement of 
Luther's preaching against indulgences. — Le Long, by Boerner, 
torn, ii, p. 349. A Sclavonic version of a great portion of the 
bible was printed at Cracow, in the beginning of the sixteenth 
century. — Dublin Review, vol. i, p. 384. Other versions in the 
Sclavonic are mentioned by Le Long. A version of the scripture 
in the dialect of Iceland is known to have existed as early as 
the year 1279. — Dublin Review, ibidem. An Icelandic version 
was also made from the German of Luther. This version was 
published in 1584. Versions of the scriptures have been made 
in the Hungarian language, both by Catholics and Protestants. 



148 



OP THE MODERN VERSIONS 



Among the modern versions of the scripture, we may also 
mention the translation into the Irish language, made by the 
Protestants. We extract from Home the following notice of 
it : — " The New Testament having been translated into Irish by 
Dr. William iDaniel, (Protestant) archbishop of Tuam, Dr. 
Bedell, who was advanced to the See of Kilmore and Ardagh in 
1629, procured the Old Testament to be translated by a Mr. 
King, who, being ignorant of the original languages, executed it 
from the English version. Bedell, (Protestant bishop of Kilmore, ) 
therefore, revised and compared it with the Hebrew, the Septua- 
gint, and the Italian version of Diodati. He supported Mr. 
King during his undertaking to the utmost of his ability ; and 
when the translation was finished, he would have printed it in 
his own house, and at his own charge, if he had not been pre- 
vented by the troubles in Ireland. The translation, however, 
escaped the hands of the rebels, and was subsequently printed in 
1685, at the expense of the Hon. Robert Boyle." — Home, Introd. 
Bibliographical Appe7idix to, vol. ii, p. 87. 

It appears from the testimonies cited in Boerner, iLe Long, 
torn, ii, p. 369,) that long before the Reformation the scriptures 
were translated into the Irish language. This version is attribu- 
ted by some to Richard Eitz-Ralph, who was appointed to the 
primatiai See of Armagh in 1347. 

Besides versions in other languages or dialects of Europe 
which we omit to specify, the bible has been printed in many of 
the modern languages of Asia, chiefly through the means of the 
English bible societies. By the means of the same, or similar 
societies, the scripture, or portions of it, have been translated into 
many of the languages of the native tribes of North America. 
But native tribes of America, and different nations of Asia, have 
had versions either of the whole scripture, or of portions of it 
made for them, and published among them, by Catholics. Of 
these American versions Horne says, u Benedict Eernandez, a 
Spanish Dominican friar, vicar of Mixteca in New Spain, trans- 
lated the epistles and gospels into the dialect spoken in that 
province. Didacus de S. Maria, another Dominican, and vicar 
of the province of Mexico, (who died in 1579,) was the author 
of a translation of the epistles and gospels into the Mexican 
tongue, or general language of the country. The Proverbs of 
Solomon and other fragments of the holy scriptures were trans- 
lated into the same language by Louis Rodriguez, a Spanish 
Franciscan friar ; and the epistles and gospels appointed to be 
read for the whole year, were translated into the idiom of the 
western Indians, by Arnold a Basaccio, also a Eranciscan friar ; 
but the elates of these latter versions have not been ascertained." 



0E THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. 



149 



— Home Introd. vol. ii, p. 120, edition, &c, ut supra. And for 
Asia we can state, with trie writer, to whom we have often 
referred already, that the Catholics have printed " several edi- 
tions of the Syriac and Arabic bible, at Eome, Venice, and 
Vienna, for the use of the Christian churches of the east. A 
translation into Ethiopic was published at Home, 1548, and 
some most exquisite editions of the Armenian bible have issued 
from the press of the Armenian monks, at San Lazaro, one of the 
Venetian islands." — Dublin Review, vol. i, p. 384. We shall 
now proceed to a subject naturally connected with the history of 
the modern versions of the scripture, and the discussion of which 
will enable us to estimate the value of those exertions for the 
distribution of the scriptures among the people, for which the 
Protestant bible societies take such credit to themselves. 



DISSEETATION X. 



OF THE READING OF TEE SCRIPTURES IN THE VULGAR TONGUE. 

Having then noticed thus briefly the principal modern versions 
of the scripture, it will not be considered out of place if we 
make a few observations on the subject of the circulation of the 
scriptures among the people in the vulgar tongue — and what 
we have to say on this subject shall be divided into two parts, 
of which the first shall treat briefly of the practice of the church 
of God in this matter, at all times — the second shall offer a few 
words in vindication of the discipline of the Catholic church, on 
this head, in these latter times. 

First. — If in the historical question, of which this first part 
treats, we push our inquiries back as far as the time of the 
Jewish church, we shall find, that at no period ol that church's 
history did any law exist rendering it obligatory on the people 
generally to read the scriptures. It was the duty of the king 
and the judges to read them, that in the government and regu- 
lation of the people they might be guided by the law of God ; 
it was the duty of the priests to read them, " whose lips were 
to keep knowledge, and at whose mouth the people were to seek 
the law." — Malachy, ii, 7. It was the duty of the Levites — 
see 2 Paralip. xvii — the duty, consequently, of the Sanhedrin, 
or great council, at whatever time it may have been instituted, 
and of the scribes and doctors of the law. As to the body of the 
people, they were provided with teachers, viz., the priests, 



1.50 



OF THE READING OF THE SCRIPTURES 



scribes, Levites, through whom they were ordinarily to learn 
the law, and the meaning of the scriptures. And hence the priests 
and Levites had their dwellings dispersed among the several 
tribes. — Josue, xxi. Hence in doubts regarding the meaning of 
the ordinances of the laiv, God does not prescribe to the Jews 
that each one shall read the law after praying for light to under- 
stand it, and that then he shall follow his own judgment as to 
its meaning ; but in the following manner does God ordain that 
difficulties about the meaning of the law shall be decided : ' ' If 
thou perceive that there be among you a hard and doubtful 
(matter) in judgment between blood and blood, cause and cause, 
leprosy and leprosy, and thou see that the words of the judges 
within thy gates do vary : arise and go up to the place which 
the Lord thy God shall choose. And thou shalt come to the 
priest of the Levitical race, and to the judge that shall be at that 
time : and thou shalt ask of them, and they shall shew thee the 
truth of the judgment. And thou shalt do whatsoever they 
shall say that preside in the place which the Lord shall choose, 
and what they shall teach thee, according to his law ; and thou 
shalt follow their sentence : neither shalt thou decline to the 
right hand nor to the left hand. But he that will be proud, and 
refuse to obey the commandment of the priest who ministereth 
at that time to the Lord thy God, and the decree of the judge, 
that man shall die, and thou shalt take away the evil from 
Israel." Deuter. xvii, 8, &c. We find it here laid down that, 
if, in a particular case, /the meaning of the law should appear 
doubtful to the inferior judges, appointed in the several towns 
to pronounce according to the law upon the cases which might 
there occur ; then recourse should be had to the place which 
God would appoint, which from the time of David, was Jerusa- 
lem, and before that time was the place, whatever it might be, 
in which the high priest dwelt ; and that there the high priest 
for the time being, in conjunction with the other priests, should 
declare the true judgment in the case, and that the judge was to 
make his decree in conformity with this declaration of the priests, 
which decree was to be most strictly obeyed. Yatable is of 
opinion that the judge here mentioned, to whom the appeal was 
to be brought, was the high priest himself ; others suppose that 
it was the chief secular authority among the Jews, who was 
bound to make the decree in conformity with the judgment of 
the high priest and his council. — See Cornel, a Lapide, comment, 
in locum. Our Redeemer also, in the gospel, gives us to under- 
stand in what way the multitude, in the ancient dispensation, 
was to learn the law of God, for thus we read in the beginning 
of the twenty-third chapter of St. Matthew : " Then J esus spoke 



IX THE YULGrAE TOXG-UE. 



151 



to the multitude and to his disciples, saying : The scribes and 
pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. All things, therefore, 
whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do," &c. Hence 
the ordinary mode of learning the law and will of God in the 
scripture, as far as the multitude was concerned, was by having 
recourse to the constituted teachers, not by their own private 
perusal of the sacred volume. Hence we are not surprised to 
find that from the time of the Babvlonish captivity, when the 
people, commonly, ceased to understand the Hebrew language, 
up to about the time of Christ's coming upon earth, there was 
no version of the scripture made for the use of the Jews of Pales- 
tine, who spoke the Syro-Chaldaic tongue. Of the Chaidaic para- 
phrases, the most ancient are those of Onkelos on the Pentateuch, 
and Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the prophets and historical books — 
and these at the earliest, date but a few years before the Christian 
era. During that long interval, however, the people were sup- 
plied with the ordinary means of arriving at such a knowledge 
of the sacred volume as it behoved them to possess ; for, the 
scriptures, L e., select portions of them, were read on the Sabbath 
days in the synagogues in the ancient Hebrew, and afterwards 
explained to the people in the Syro-Chaldaic tongue. If it be 
said that before the captivity the synagogues were not in exis- 
tence, and that, therefore, the people had then to acquire their 
knowledge of the scripture from their own private reading, we 
answer, that before the captivity there were the schools of the 
prophets, in which were sung the praises of God, and where, 
upon Sabbaths and new moons, the more pious people assembled 
to be instructed by the prophets. Moreover, as has been already 
observed, we are informed in Josue (chap, xxi), that the priests 
and Levites — the constituted teachers of the people — had their 
cities, wherein they abode, scattered through the several tribes. 
— (See Archceologia Bihlica of Jahn, De locis sacris, s. 332.) 

The Septuagint version, indeed, is much more ancient than 
any Chaidaic paraphrase, but whatever cause may have led to 
the making of that version, no ancient authority, either Jewish 
or Christian, ever supposed for a moment, that it originated in 
the desire to provide the multitude of the Jews who spoke the 
Greek language with the means of discharging its obligation of 
perusing the scriptures. We all know that, according to the 
common opinion, the idea of making such a version did not 
originate with the Jews at all, but with the king of Egypt, and 
his librarian Demetrius Phalereus. If the Jews of Alexandria 
made this version of their own accord, then the object appears 
to have been to consult for the convenience of the doctors in the 
synagogues, who would find it less troublesome to read the scrip- 



152 



OP THE READING OE THE SCEIPTEEES 



ture in the Greek language for the people, than to imitate their 
brethren in Judea, who first read it in the Hebrew, and then 
explained it in the language with which the people were fami- 
liar. As there was no obligation on the part of the people 
commonly, to peruse the scriptures, so we cannot say to what 
extent the custom prevailed at any time among them, of attend- 
ing to the private reading of the scriptures. Certainly, as we 
have just now seen, between the captivity and the time of 
Christ's coming, the people of Palestine were not provided with 
the scriptures in that language which they understood ; nor is 
it likely that at any time, even before the captivity, had the 
people generally the means of perusing the scriptures ; seeing 
the difficulty that then existed of multiplying the copies of the 
sacred volume to the extent that would have been requisite for 
this purpose. Thus, looking even to the favoured kingdom of 
Juda, in the reign of king Josaphat, we may infer from a passage 
in the second book of Paralip. and seventeenth chapter, that 
the sacred volume was not in the hands of the people of that 
kingdom generally at that period ; since the teachers, whom 
that pious king sent through the various cities of his kingdom to 
instruct his people, are expressly said to have had with them for 
that purpose the book of the law of the Lord ; a circumstance 
that would hardly have been thus mentioned, if copies of the 
book of the law had been commonly in the hands of the people 
whom they went to instruct. The following is the passage 
referred to : " And in the third year of his reign, he sent of his 
princes, Benhail and Abdias, and Zacharias, and ]S~athanael, and 
Micheas, to teach in the cities of Juda : and with them the 
Levites, Semeias, and 2sathanias, and Zabadias, and Asael, and 
Semiramoth, and Jonathan, and Adonias, and Tobias, and 
Thobadonias, Levites, and with them Elisama and Jorum, priests. 
And they taught the people in Juda, having with them the 
book of the law of the Lord : and they went about all the cities 
of Juda, and instructed the people." 2 Paralip., xvii, 7-9. 
Several of the fathers — Origen, St. Jerome, St. Gregory Nazi- 
anzen — assure us, that the synagogue did not permit young 
persons to read certain portions of the scriptures, that is, the 
beginning of Genesis, the beginning and the end of Ezechiel, and 
the Canticle of Canticles, which is a clear proof that the rulers 
of the Jewish church did not acknowledge the existence of an 
obligation^ on the part of the people, to peruse the sacred 
volume. — See Glaire, Infroduc. torn, i, p. 319. Here will 
be objected to me the words of our Redeemer in the Gospel, 
addressed to the Jews — " Search the scriptures." — St. John, v, 
39. The advocate of bible reading will tell me, that if these 



IN THE VULGAR TONGUE, 



153 



words are properly rendered in the imperative mood, then they 
prove the obligation on the part of the Jews generally to read 
the scriptures ; whilst, if they are to be rendered in the indica- 
tive, they will at least declare the fact, that the Jews did 
generally read the sacred volume. But I answer — that, what- 
ever may be the proper way of rendering this text, the words in 
question were not intended to apply to the Jews generally, but 
only to the scribes, priests, and pharisees, who were much given 
to bible reading, and whom our Redeemer here tells, if He 
speaks imperatively, not to be satisfied with a superficial perusal 
of the sacred book, but to read it attentively, so as not to mistake 
its meaning. That the persons to whom these words were 
addressed were such as I have mentioned appears by the 
circumstances in which they were uttered. Our Redeemer was 
after performing a most wonderful miracle — restoring in an 
instant to perfect health and strength a man, who had been for 
thirty-eight years suffering from some grievous infirmity. The 
Jews to whom our Redeemer addresses the words in question 
were those, who, so far from acknowledging the hand of God in 
the work which had been performed, took occasion from it to 
persecute Jesus the more, because it was upon the Sabbath day 
that He told the man to take up his bed and walk. These 
persecutors must have been the priests, scribes, and pharisees, 
seeing that the multitude, when left to its own unbiassed judg- 
ment, always on witnessing the wonderful works of the 
Redeemer, pronounced that the finger of God was there. The 
pharisees themselves acknowledged this opposition to their views 
on the part of the multitude, and it is curious enough, that they 
appear to ascribe this opposition to the fact, that the multitude 
did not read the bible. Thus, in the seventh chapter of St. 
John's gospel, verses 48, 49, the pharisees say : " Hath any one 
of the rulers believed in him, or of the pharisees? But this 
multitude that knoweth not the law, are accursed." Again to 
the same persons, to whom our Redeemer addresses the words, 
Search the scriptures,'' he, a little further on, says — 44th 
verse of that fifth chapter of St. John — " How can you believe, 
who receive glory from one another : and the glory, which is 
from God alone, you do not seek ? " by which words he most 
clearly points to the scribes and pharisees. The example of the 
Bereans mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, and to which we 
shall advert more particularly in the sequel of this chapter, does 
not prove, either that the Jews, commonly, were bound by any 
precept to read the scriptures, or that, in the time of the syna- 
gogue, the Jews were generally given to the private reading of 
the bible. That neither the one point nor the other is proved 



I5i OF THE READIXG OF THE SCEIPTURES 

by that example, will be sufficiently clear to any one who will 
reflect for a moment upon the passage of the Acts which has 
reference to the Bereans. But of this, more just now. 

We now proceed to detail briefly what has been the practice 
of the Christian church, with respect to the reading of the scrip- 
tures. ^ We shall find upon inquiry, that the practice of the 
Christian church at all times, upon this head, has been quite 
irreconcilable with the supposition, that the Founder of that 
church or His apostles imposed any obligation upon all Chris- 
tians, generally, to read the scriptures. No doubt, it was 
always considered a sacred duty on the part of the clergy — the 
spiritual guides and teachers of the people — to read the scrip- 
tures. These should read them in the prayers and offices of the 
church. They should read them also, in order to qualify them- 
selves for the instruction of those committed to their care. As 
to the simple faithful ; the rule in the Christian church has 
always been, that they should learn the doctrines of religion, 
and their duty to God, by means of the instruction of the consti- 
tuted teachers in the church. The private study, or perusal, of the 
sacred volume, has never been made obligatory upon them. For a 
length of time after the promulgation of the new law, there 
could be no question of the reading of the ]Sew Testament, 
because it had not yet existed. And even, when after the lapse 
of a considerable time this portion of the sacred writings was 
complete, there must have been still many who did not read it, 
either because they had not learned to read, or because copies of 
the book were not so easily procured as to leave it within the 
reach of all to possess it. For, we must remember, that during 
the long period of the church's existence which preceded the 
invention of printing, copies of books were multiplied with 
great difficulty, and sold at a high price. Of course, the epistles 
of St. Paul must have been read repeatedly for the assembled 
faithful of the several churches to which they were addressed. 
The rulers of these churches, to whose hands in the first 
instance the epistles were committed, would, no doubt, 
consider it their duty to have them thus read. INor was 
this public reading in the church confined to the epistles 
of St. Paul : it extended to the gospels, and the other por Lions 
of the Kew Testament — nor was the Old Testament left out. 
And the church, from an early period, made provision for the 
continuance of this practice of publicly reading the scripture in 
the assembly of the faithful ; for, not to speak of the manner in 
which She has embodied in Her liturgy the several portions of 
the scriptures. She instituted the minor order of Beader, whose 
duty, among other things, as the catechism of the Council of 



TN THE VfXOAIt TOXCTCE. 



155 



Trent observes, " was to read to the people, in a clear and dis- 
tinct voice, the sacred scriptures." — See Catechism of the Council 
of Trent on the Sacrament of Orders. The private pernsal of the 
scriptures was far from universal at any time among the simple 
faithful, for, as St. Iremeus informs us, " there v:ere many oarla- 
rous nations who diligently preserved the ancient tradition, without the 
aid of paper and ink." This private perusal became still less common 
in the church, in proportion as these languages, Greek, Latin, 
Syriac — in which the scriptures are found from the early days of 
the church, wore out of the knowledge of the people. For, not 
only were there nations of other tongues brought into the church, 
but even among the people who spoke the languages above men- 
tioned, these languages, in progress of time, became so much 
altered as to cease to be intelligible to the great bulk of the people 
in that early dialect in which the scriptures were found. 2sow, 
the supply of versions at all times was very far from keeping 
pace with these changes, by which such versions became neces- 
sary, if the people commonly were to be afforded an opportunity 
of perusing the scriptures. This point is well proved by the 
illustrious bishop of Bruges, M. Malou, in the second volume of 
his work, La Lecture de La Sainte Bible en Langue Vulgaire, 
p. 327, Louvain, 1846. The custom must have prevailed for a 
considerable time, in several places, to read first for the assem- 
bled faithful in the church a portion of the scripture in one of 
these languages which may be well termed ecclesiastical, and 
afterwards to explain it in the language or dialect with which 
the people were acquainted. And when versions began to be 
introduced, these, in various places, did not, for a length of time, 
extend beyond certain portions of the sacred text, as for instance, 
the epistles and gospels read in the liturgy during the year. 
Hence we may conclude, from what has been already said, that 
do wn at least to the period of the invention of printing, the pri- 
vate reading of the scripture must have been, for great numbers 
in the church, an impossibility, which impossibility arose from 
one or more of the following causes : First, the want of knowing 
how to read — Second, the want of means to purchase books — 
Third, the want of versions intelligible to the people. After the 
invention of printing, the reading of the scripture, no doubt, be- 
came more general, as we may infer from the number of editions 
in the modern languages, which, as we have already seen, issued 
from the press, even before the period of the so-called Eeforma- 
tion ; yet, even then, the obstacles before-mentioned continued, 
although not to the same extent, to prevent many from reading 
the sacred volume. After the commencement of the Reforma- 
tion, when, under the guise of a pretended zeal for the diffusion 



156 



OF THE READING- OF THE SCRIPTURES 



of scriptural knowledge, the reformers attempted to pervert trie 
faith of the people by means of corrupt versions, and by exhort- 
ing every one to interpret the scripture for himself, then the 
church considered it necessary to impose certain restrictions on 
the liberty of reading the scriptures in the modern versions. 
!Nor was this the first occasion on which the ecclesiastical 
authority interposed, in order to guard against the abuses which 
mi^ht follow from the unrestricted use of these versions ; for we 
find Innocent III, in the year 1199, praising the zeal of the 
bishop of Metz, who denounced to the holy see certain persons 
of his diocese, who, having procured a French version of some 
portions of the scriptures, held clandestine assemblies, in which 
they not only read these scriptures, but also presumptuously 
usurped to themselves the ministry of preaching. Pius VII, in 
his letter to the bishop of Mohilew, quotes largely from the 
admirable epistle which Innocent III addressed upon this oc- 
casion to the faithful Metz. Again, in the year 1229, the 
provincial Council of Toulouse prohibited to the laity the use of 
versions in the vulgar tongue. — See in Labb. the Council of Tou- 
louse, held in the year 1229, canon 14. The object of this decree 
was to guard the simple faithful against the artifices of the Albi- 
genses, who were continually attempting to force upon the 
people the most false and ridiculous interpretations of the sacred 
text. However, it was after the Reformation that that law, in 
reference to the use of the modern versions, was introduced, 
which prevails generally now throughout the church, and we 
may say everywhere, at least as to the substance of the law. 
This is the law laid down in the rules of the index librorum. 
These rules were drawn up by a number of the fathers of Trent, 
chosen for the purpose by the council, and they were afterwards 
confirmed by Pius IV in the constitution of the 24th March, 
1564, which begins with the words Dominici gregis. The third 
rule has reference to the prohibition of those versions and com- 
mentaries which proceed from condemned authors. The fourth 
rule regulates as follows : " Since experience has made it mani- 
fest that the reading of the bible in the vulgar tongue, if it is 
permitted to all indiscrimiDately, causes through the temerity of 
men more detriment than utility, let the judgment of the bishop 
or the inquisitor be followed in this matter, who, with the ad- 
vice of the parish priest or confessor, can permit the reading of 
those versions in the vulgar tongue that have been made by 
Catholic authors, to those whom they shall know to be fit to 
derive from this reading, not detriment, but an increase of faith 
and piety — and let this permission be in writing." These rules 
were confirmed by Clement VIII in 1596. In the decree of the 



IX THE TUXGrAK TOXGUE. 



157 



congregation of the index of the 13th of June, 1757, under 
Benedict XIV, it is laid down that — " These versions of the bible 
in the vulgar tongue are permitted when they have been ap- 
proved of by the Holy See, or are published with notes drawn 
from the Holy Fathers or from learned Catholic writers.' ' Both 
the law laid down in the fourth rule of the index, and this ad- 
dition to that law in the decree of the congregation of the index 
of the 13th of June, 1757, have been often insisted upon by the 
Popes since, as may be seen in the various documents relating to 
the bible societies which have emanated from the Holy See in 
these latter times. We deem it unnecessary to quote the words 
of these documents. They are principally the following — which 
may be seen at full in the work of bishop Malou, above-mentioned, 
torn, ii, p. 520, &c. — viz. : the letter of Pius VII to the bishop 
of Gnesne, in Poland, in 1816 ; letter of the same pope to the 
bishop of Mohilew in the same year ; notice of the bible societies 
in the encyclical letter of Leo XII, in 1824 ; notice of the same 
societies in the encyclical letter of Pius VIII, in 1829; the 
encyclical letter of Gregory XVI, by which he condemns the 
bible society founded in America for the circulation of the bible 
in Italy : this letter bears the date of the 8th of May, 1844. 
From an examination of all these documents — that is, the fourth 
rule of the index, the decree of the congregation of the index of 
the 13th of June, 1757, and the other documents to which we 
have referred just now, it appears that the faithful are per- 
mitted to read a modern version of the scriptures, if it have the 
approbation of the Holy See, declaring that it is fit to be read by 
reason ol its fidelity as a version and of its being accompanied 
with a sufficient number of notes. But if an approbation of this 
kind shall not have been given by the Holy See to a version — 
then, according to the fourth rule in the index, the bishop (or 
the inquisitor, where there is such a functionary) is to be the 
judge of how far such a version is to be permitted to be read or 
not (of course, as it has been observed before, this fourth rule of 
the index only speaks of versions made by Catholic authors.) 
]Now it appears clear enough that the discipline here stated, pre- 
vails, at least as to the substance of the thing, throughout the 
whole church at the present clay, although the law of the index 
is not so literally enforced in some places as in others. Perhaps, 
indeed, in these countries the restriction imposed upon the read- 
ing of the scripture in the vulgar tongue is less than in any 
other part of the church, as would appear from considering how 
brief and few are the notes appended to the sacred text in our 
Douay and Ehemish version, when compared with the notes of 
other modern Catholic versions. 



158 



OF THE iiEADIXG OF THE SCKIPTUEES 



We proceed to vindicate this discipline, which, as we have 
observed, prevails now, at least substantially, everywhere in the 
church. But before passing from the historical part of this dis- 
sertation we shall just observe, that at no period of Her existence 
did the Catholic church ever conceive the wonderful project of 
attempting the conversion of infidel nations by merely dissemi- 
nating the sacred text among them in their own languages. 
Such an attempt, on the folly of which we shall dwell more 
fully afterwards, was reserved for the innovators of these latter 
times. 

To proceed now with the second part of our dissertation, we 
trust that the following observations will be found to contain an 
ample vindication of the present discipline of the Catholic church 
on the matter in question. We must observe, in the first place, 
that the church has never prohibited to the laity the reading of 
the scripture in the original languages, or in the ancient versions. 
But this permission, it will be said, is of no use to the great 
body of the people, because they do not understand these lan- 
guages ; it is only in the vulgar tongue, with which they are 
acquainted, that the scripture is intelligible to them ; and yet, 
our adversaries go od to say, the scripture in this vulgar tongue, 
even when the version is acknowledged to be faithful, will not be 
permitted to the people by the ecclesiastical superior, unless upon 
certain conditions which cannot be insisted on without exclud- 
ing many from the reading of the scripture. This is the conduct 
of which our adversaries — the biblicals — complain, and which 
we defend. We may here observe, that the conditions insisted 
udou in some places are but few, as for example, in this country, 
where it is only required that one bring to the reading of our 
approved version humility, submission to the doctrine of the 
Catholic church, and a readiness to be guided by the approved 
notes which are appended to our bible : but the arguments 
which we shall adduce, will be sufficient to vindicate the prac- 
tice of the church in those countries also where a more stringent 
discipline is enforced. In the first place, then, we lay it down 
as certain, that no divine precept exists imposing upon the 
laity an obligation to read the scripture. We have seen in the 
preceding part of this dissertation, that in the practice of the 
church at any time no proof is to be found of the existence of 
such a precept. The reading of the scripture is not necessary 
to the laity for the purpose of knowing what must be believed, 
or what must be practised, in order to gain eternal life ; and such 
being the case, it appears unreasonable to admit the existence of a 
precept to read the scriptures without some clear authority to 
that effect, either in scripture or in tradition ; and we may 



JN THE VULGAR TOISTGITE. 



159 



observe, that it is only to a scriptural proof that our adversaries, 
if consistent, will attach any importance. But neither in scrip- 
ture nor in tradition will they find sufficient grounds to warrant 
the conclusion that the reading of the scripture is obligatory on 
the laity. The text from the fifth chapter of St. John's gospel, 
" search the scriptures," is always put in the front of their 
arguments by our adversaries. But this is a passage of doubtful 
construction, and, according even to many learned Protestants, 
it ought to be translated into the indicative mood. Besides, 
these words were not addressed to Christians, that is, to the 
disciples of Christ, but to the Jews ; and, as we have shown in a 
preceding part of the chapter, they were not addressed to the 
multitude, but to the scribes and pharisees, that is, to the teachers ; 
and we have no objection to admit, that the teachers of the peo- 
ple in the Christian church are bound to read and studv the 
scriptures. Much less could this obligation of reading the scrip- 
tures be inferred from the words of St. Paul to Timothv, " all 
scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to 
correct, to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be per- 
fect, furnished to every good work." — 2 Tim. iii, 16, 17. We 
admit, that the reading of the scripture is most profitable, not 
only to the man of God, that is, the teacher of the people, to fit 
him for his several duties, but to every one that is prepared to 
come to the reading of it with proper dispositions ; and this text, 
at the farthest, proves nothing more. jS"or does the example of the 
Bereans, mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, prove the obli- 
gation in question. This conduct of the Bereans here referred 
to is so otten lauded by the advocates of bible reading, as if it 
proved everything which they require, that it becomes necessary 
to examine closely the meaning and force of what is said, in the 

Acts of the Apostles respecting them. — (Chap, xvii, 10, 11,) 

4 'But the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas bv 
night unto Berea. Who, when they were come hither, went 
into the synagogue of the Jews. Now, these were more noble 
than those in Thessalonica, who received the word with all 
eagerness, daily searching the scriptures, whether these things 
were so." 

Now, in the first place, the Bereans were Jews, not Chris- 
tians, whilst they were "searching the scriptures to know if 
these things were so." Again ; the passage does not contain one 
word which implies an obligation, it merely states a fact. St. 
Paul could not propose to the Jews of Berea any doctrine that 
was not from God — but this was not evident to them, until by 
miracles, or other arguments, he proved to them the truth of his 
doctrine. He referred them to the scriptures, which they had 



160 



OF THE READING OF THE SCRIPTURES 



in their hands, for the prophecies concerning the Christ, and 
they examined to see if these were as he had stated. Such is 
the entire force of a passage so much dwelt upon by the bibli- 
cals ; and the absurdity of quoting it as at all opposed to the 
practice of the Catholic church appears by this, that the Catholic 
church in those countries in which its discipline is most strin- 
gent with respect to the reading of the scripture in the vulgar 
tongue, would be always ready to invite the Jews to imitate the 
conduct of the Bereans in searching the scriptures, and seeing 
that these things in these scriptures to which they were referred 
by the Catholic preachers were so. What now are we to think 
of those who put forward this passage of the Acts as sanctioning 
that extravagant principle, which, after all, is the very essence 
of Protestantism, viz., that it is the duty of every Christian to 
be guided by his own views of the meaning of scripture as to 
whether he will admit or reject *any doctrine proposed by a 
Christian teacher ? — Thus, Dr. Whately in the "Address to his 
Clergy," 1836, p. 74. It is needless to say that such a prin- 
ciple, on the extravagance of which we shall say something in 
another place, does not derive a shadow of support from the 
passage under discussion. We see that St. Paul, writing to the 
Christian churches, insists constantly on the indisputable truth 
of the doctrine which he teaches, and never on the part of these 
does he tolerate any delay in giving assent to his preaching. 
This is so clear in his epistles that no one but a complete stranger 
to his writings would venture to deny it. Had the Bereans then 
been Christians their conduct upon the occasion in question 
would have been altogether unjustifiable, and, consequently, all 
the reasoning of the biblicals from this passage falls to the 
ground. In fine, there is no passage of scripture in which it is 
either expressed or implied that all Christians are under an 
obligation of reading the bible, nor does tradition establish the 
obligation in question. The biblicals in this matter appeal to 
tradition also — inconsistently enough, seeing how often they 
profess their disregard for tradition, and their adhesion to the 
bible alone. Even here, however, they meet with no support 
for their theory. The illustrious bishop of Bruges, M. Malou, 
most fully proves in the first volume of his book, [La Lecture de 
La Sainte Bible en Lang ue Vulgaire, p. 248, &c), that no one of 
the Fathers — not even St. Chrysostom, to whom, above all 
others, the biblicals appeal, has ever asserted the existence of a 
precept binding all Christians to read the bible. 

St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, and St. Jerome, to all of 
whom our opponents here refer, at the most but exhort to the 
reading of the scripture ; and as to St. Augustine and St. Jerome, 



IX THE VULGAR TOXGTJE. 



161 



they have made it clear enough that their exhortations are 
addressed only to the pious and well-instructed Christian ; and 
St. Chrysostom, who was in the habit of instructing the people 
by means of homilies on various parts of the scripture, is found 
in those passages of his discourses in which he insists most 
strongly on the reading of the scripture to be only exhorting his 
hearers to read over privately, before coming to church, that 
portion of the scripture which he had announced on the previous 
Sunday that he would explain for them, that thus they might be 
better prepared to profit by his discourse, and that he might be 
spared the additional trouble of having to teach them what the 
text was as well as the explanation of it. It is, moreover, quite 
certain, from many parts of the works of these fathers that they 
all required from the reader of the bible a perfect submission to 
the teaching of the church. 

Seeing, then, that no obligation is imposed on Christians 
generally to read the scripture, it becomes an easy matter to 
vindicate the discipline of the Catholic church with respect to 
the reading of the scripture in the vulgar tongue ; and this dis- 
cipline may be here again thus briefly stated, viz. certain dispo- 
sitions are required on the part of the laity who wish to read these 
vulgar versions made by Catholics; and if they hare not those dis- 
positions the reading of such versions is prohibited to them. In 
some places, viz. where the law of the index is strictly enforced, 
permission must be obtained by each person from the proper autho- 
rity, who is to make himself acquainted with the dispositions of the 
party seeking such permission. In other places, as in these countries, 
with respect to our English version, the permission is granted gene- 
rally to all who bring the proper dispositions. To vindicate this 
discipline it is quite sufficient to observe that the church is per- 
fectly authorised to legislate upon a matter such as this, which 
no divine precept has withdrawn from the sphere of her legisla- 
tion. For, clear is the voice of tradition on the point, and 
numerous are the texts of scripture which prove it, that Christ 
established a church, and invested it with full authority to 
legislate on all such matters as appertain to the spiritual good of 
its children, and are not already determined by some divine law. 
The proofs of this point have been so often set forth by Catholic 
theologians, and are so well known that we think it unnecessary 
to produce them here. But, our biblical opponents will tell us, 
that even admitting that the people generally are not bound 
by any precept to read the bible, yet, that they have a per- 
fect right to do so — a right with which no authority upon 
earth can interfere. Our answer to this assertion is, that the 

M 



162 



OP THE HEADING OF THE SCRIPTURES 



people* have only such a right to read the scriptures as the church 
sanctions and approves ; and by establishing this our assertion, we 
shall put an end to the whole controversy. Well, then, in the first 
place, since the people generally are not bound by any divine pre- 
cept to read the scriptures they must be provided otherwise with 
the means of knowing what they are to believe and practise- — this 
means they have in the church's teaching — therefore the church 
is authorised and qualified to teach the people what they are to 
believe and practise, and this she does by her established minis- 
try. Again, as we said before, and as is abundantly proved by 
our theologians, the church has a perfect right to legislate upon 
all such matters as appertain to the spiritual interests of her 
children, and are not already fixed by some divine law : now, 
from these considerations we infer, that the church can withhold 
permission to read the scriptures from all such as bring not to 
that reading those dispositions which she considers necessary ; 
and consequently, that the people have not such an independent 
right to read the scriptures as the biblicals would contend for. 
ISo — the church asserts her right to insist upon certain condi- 
tions, and to withhold permission to read the bible where these 
conditions are not complied with, and this right must be conceded 
to the church, unless some divine law can be produced prohibit- 
ing her interference in this matter, ^ow, no such law can be 
produced. On the contrary, the right of the church in this very 
particular can be clearly and positively proved from various pas- 
sages of the scripture itself. First, the existence of the right for 
which we contend on the part of the pastors and teachers of the 
church implies, that to these in the first instance the scriptures 
have been committed by God to be by them communicated 
according to the rules of prudence to the people ; and that the 
scripture has been committed in this way to the keeping of the 
pastors of the church is proved from the first Epistle to the 
Corinthians, iv, 1 : — " Let a man so account of us as the minis- 
ters of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God." 
According to all interpreters what is here said is not to be 
restricted to the apostles, but to be extended to all the pastors 
and teachers of God's church ; and, admitting that the word 
mysteries refers to the sacraments, it also designates the myste- 
rious doctrine of God ; and therefore it also is committed to the 
pastors of the church, who as the faithful stewards of God's 
house, which is the church, are to distribute to the people the 
spiritual food, which is the word of God, whether it is contained 

* We here use the word people in contradistinction to the pastors and 
teachers in the church. 



IN THE VULGAR TONGUE. 



163 



in the scripture or learned by tradition. St. Paul's own conduct 
when preaching to the Corinthians, as it is detailed by himself 
in this epistle, throws wonderful light, as well upon this text 
which we have quoted, as upon the application which we make 
of it. St. Paul tells the Corinthians that when preaching among 
them he did not deliver the whole doctrine of God to every one, 
because every one was not fit to receive it. There was a more 
profound doctrine and a more profound explanation of the rudi- 
ments of the Christian doctrine : this the apostle designates by 
the name of wisdom, and this he withheld from many of the 
Corinthians because they were not fit to receive it. This the 
apostle communicated only to the spiritual — to those who, by a 
habit of reflecting upon the truths of the Christian religion which 
they had already learned, were prepared to estimate the wisdom 
of God in any doctrine by the principles of faith, and not by the 
carnal — animal notions of the unreflecting Christian, whom the 
apostle calls the animal man. And the apostle gives the Corin- 
thians to understand that if he had preached this profound doc- 
trine — this wisdom — indiscriminately to all, he would have 
acted as imprudently as the nurse who gives solid food to a child 
whose stomach is incapable of bearing it. — See the first Epistle 
to the Corinthians, chap, ii, iii. In this conduct of the apostle 
we recognise the faithful and prudent dispenser of the myste- 
ries of God. Hence, as I said, it illustrates the text which has 
been quoted from the beginning of the fourth chapter of this first 
Epistle to the Corinthians ; and we shall now see how this same 
conduct of the apostle warrants us in quoting that same text of 
the fourth chapter to justify the discipline of the Catholic church 
with respect to the reading of the scripture by the people. We 
see, in the first place, that all the Christians of Corinth had not 
a right to insist that all the mysterious and holy doctrine of God 
which had been revealed to the apostles should be communicated 
to them. On the contrary, it appertained to the apostle's duty 
as a faithful and prudent dispenser of the mysterious doctrine of 
God, to withhold the more profound doctrine from those whom 
he terms animal men, that is, from those who for want of reflect- 
ing upon divine things had not as yet freed their minds from those 
rude and worldly notions which would have prevented them from 
appreciating the wisdom of God in this more profound doctrine, and 
would have led them to undervalue it. In the same way, then, 
as every Christian at Corinth had not a right to insist that the 
apostle should communicate the whole doctrine of God to him, so 
neither has every Christian a right that the whole scripture 
should be thrown open to him, because, as there were many 
animal men among the Christians in Corinth, as appears by that 



164 



OP THE READING OF THE SCRIPTURES 



first Epistle of St. Paul, so, there are still to be found in the 
church many animal men ; and as that portion of the divine doc- 
trine, committed to him as a faithful dispenser, which St. Paul 
terms wisdom, was to be withheld from the animal man until he 
acquired those dispositions which would render this solid food 
nutritious and not injurious to him ; in like manner the scrip- 
tures, which contain abundantly that wisdom of which the apostle 
speaks, are not to be put without reserve into the hands of the 
animal men in the church ; and the pastors of the church have 
succeeded to the apostle in that stewardship of prudently com- 
municating to the people the profound doctrine of wisdom, or 
withholding it from them, as the case may be. We see now how 
that text of the fourth chapter to the Corinthians, first Epistle, 
comes to prove what I assert, viz., that the right which the 
simple faithful have to read the scripture is not a right indepen- 
dent of the sanction and approval of the pastors of the church. 
Nor will our adversaries, if they reflect for a moment, attempt to 
set aside this conclusive argument by saying that the scriptures 
do not contain that wisdom of which the apostle speaks in the 
first Epistle to the Corinthians : for, this would be to say that 
this wisdom, which, doubtless was communicated to the apostle 
for the benefit of the church, has been handed down by tradition, 
whilst the scripture contains only the plain and obvious doc- 
trines ; such doctrines as are proportioned to the capacity of the 
little ones in Christ. Now, this assertion is untenable for many 
reasons ; but it is unnecessary for us to delay in refuting it, see- 
ing that it is so directly opposed to the principles of our adver- 
saries, who contend that the scriptures contain the whole apos- 
tolic doctrine. And we may observe here, that Origen, in his 
first homily on the Canticle of Canticles, expressly says that in 
this book is the solid food referred to by St. Paul in his Epistle 
to the Hebrews, v, 14, — "strong meat is for the perfect," and 
he dissuades those from reading it who are not perfect. We 
have arrived now at these two conclusions : First, that the 
simple faithful are bound by no divine law to read the scriptures. 
Second, that whatever right the simple faithful have to read the 
scripture is not a right independent of the sanction and approval 
of the pastors of the church. These two conclusions are abun- 
dantly sufficient to vindicate the discipline of the Catholic church 
in this matter of the reading of the scripture by the people. Let 
us now consider how reasonable the conditions are which the 
church requires previously to giving her sanction and appro- 
val to the reading of the scriptures by the people. We shall 
first, however, examine a text of the New Testament, which 
wonderfully confirms all that we have said upon that text of the 



IN THE VULGAR TONGUE. 



165 



fourth chapter of St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians : — 
the text to which I refer is found in the second Epistle of St. 
Peter, iii, 15, 16, " . . . .as also our most dear brother Paul, 
according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you : as also 
in all (his) epistles, speaking in them of these things ; in which 
are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned 
and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures to their 
own destruction." This text proves that the sense of the scrip- 
ture is not always plain and obvious — that if parts of it are easily 
understood, there are also in it certain things hard to be understood. 
And again, as it appears from this passage that there were in 
the church in the time of St. Peter unlearned and unstable per- 
sons ; so, there is no reason to say that there are not such persons 
in the church still ; and surely these persons have no reason to 
complain if those scriptures which they would wrest to their own 
destruction are withheld from them until they comply with the 
conditions which will be their security against such a dreadful 
evil. 

To come now to the conditions upon which the churph has a 
right to insist before that the scriptures shall be thrown open to the 
people. We do not insist here upon any particular order in their 
enumeration. We begin with this one — First — That those who 
would read the scripture in a version, must procure a Catholic ver- 
sion. A most reasonable condition surely, seeing how easy it is 
for a translator hostile to the church to pervert the meaning of 
numerous passages, and thus mislead the unlearned reader. 

Second, — The church has also a right to require that even a 
Catholic version, i.e., a version made by a Catholic author, shall 
not be put into the hands of the people until it shall have received 
the approbation of the proper ecclesiastical authority : because it 
belongs to the duty of the church to take care that the people 
shall not be misled by a translator who, either wilfully or through 
ignorance, misrepresents his original. 

Third. — The church, when it pleases, has a right to require 
that the people shall read -those versions only which are accompanied 
with explanatory notes taken from the fathers or approved Catholic 
commentators. Because, since there is a body of teachers estab- 
lished in the church whom the people are bound to hear and obey, 
it follows that the people are not at liberty to attach to the 

i scriptures any meaning opposed to the teaching of the church, 
or at variance with the unanimous interpretation of the fathers — 
those witnesses of the apostolic doctrine. Any such meaning 
would be false. Kow, without the explanatory notes of which 
we speak, the people would often be exposed to the danger of 

attaching these unsound meanings to the scripture. Besides, 



136 



OF THE KEADIXG OF THE SCKIPTT7KES 



■without such notes, various parts of the scripture, by reason of 
their obscurity, would convey no instruction whatever to the 
unlearned. 

Finally — the pastors of the church have a right to prohibit the 
reading of the scripture altogether to those, who are at the same 
time unlearned and unstable — more likely to indulge in their oivn 
curious speculations, to the great danger of their faith, than to be 
guided by the notes of learned Catholic writers. The pastors of 
the church have a perfect right to act in this way, because by 
doing so they only consult for the true interests of such persons 
by withholding from them a spiritual food, which, whilst it is 
not necessary for them, would, on account of their imperfect 
dispositions, prove destructive to them ; in the same way as the 
nurse consults for the physical health of the child by withhold- 
ing from it the solid food which its stomach is yet incapable of 
converting into nutriment, and which, consequently, would prove 
the ruin of its health. But we have now established principles 
more than enough to vindicate the most stringent discipline 
which the pastors of the church have at any time enacted in the 
matter under consideration. It remains for us to explain why 
it is that the church has never imposed any restriction upon the 
reading of the original text of the scripture ; and why it is that 
the discipline of latter times, in reference to versions, is so 
stringent when compared with that which prevailed in the early 
times of the church. Before explaining this, we must premise — 
First, that since the restrictions imposed upon the people in the 
reading of the scripture appertain to discipline, we need not be 
surprised that the practice of the church has not been uniform 
in this matter. Second, it must be admitted that the church 
always insisted upon the people's bringing to the reading of the 
scripture the essential dispositions for respect of the word of God, 
humility, and submission to the church's teaching. That the 
two first dispositions were always required will be admitted by 
our adversaries, and that the third was also insisted upon is 
manifest, from the way in which the pastors of the church have 
at all times exacted the assent of the people to their teaching. 
To explain now the question proposed, we say — First, That in 
the times of primitive fervour there was less reason to appre- 
hend the want of the proper dispositions on the part of the 
people. That spirit of dangerous curiosity was not then abroad 
by which these latter times are characterised, and of which the 
Reformers availed themselves, exhorting, as they did, the people 
to read the scripture, and throwing off all submission to the 
church's teaching, to judge for themselves. Secondly, In the 
early times of the church, but few of the unlearned among the 



m THE VULGAR TONGUE. 



167 



people had the means of reading the scripture privately. Some 
will object here, that the great knowledge which Christians, in 
the early times, had of the sacred text, cannot be reconciled 
with this statement. Bat we answer, that the multitudes be- 
came thus acquainted with the text by listening to the pastors 
of the church explaining it. In truth, in these early times, 
copies of the scripture were not multiplied with such facility as 
at present, nor could they be procured without considerable ex- 
pense ; and there were not then those wealthy Christians, who, 
whilst they made ail religion consist in reading the bible, paid 
numerous scribes for multiplying copies, that they might furnish 
every poor man with a bible gratis. For these reasons the 
church did not at its commencement impose the same restric- 
tions on the reading of the scriptures as she found it necessary 
to impose in these latter times. And if the church has never — 
not even in these latter times — imposed any restriction on the 
reading of the original texts or of the ancient versions, the reason 
is, because the knowledge of the original texts and of these 
ancient versions soon became limited to the learned and well- 
instructed Christians, who, in reading them, would not be ex- 
posed to those dangers which, even in the time of St. Peter, 
proved so disastrous to the unlearned and unstable Christian. 
But the limits which we have prescribed to ourselves in this work 
warn us to bring this dissertation to a close. Before passing, 
however, to another subject, we must be allowed to make a few 
observations upon that extraordinary zeal which many of those 
who promote bible reading evince for the diffusion of bibles 
among infidel peoples, as if this diffusion were a means well 
adapted to gain over these infidels to the Christian faith. JN~ow, 
the folly of this conduct must be manifest to every one who 
devotes a moment's reflection to the matter : for, we ask, are 
there not many things in the scripture which, to the uninstructed 
infidel will be unintelligible ? many things which will appear to 
him contradictory ? and many things which to his proud and 
carnal mind will appear irreconcilable with the notion which one 
ought to form of the Deity ? Of each class of difficulties it 
would be easy to procure examples. And if, as appears from 
what we have said, even the unlearned Christian requires the 
assistance of a guide or of the commentaries of the learned in 
order to read this holy scripture without clanger to his faith, and 
to derive profit from it ; what are we to think of those who 
imagine that they have laid the best foundation for the reception 
of the gospel by infidel nations if they have prevailed upon them 
merely to accept copies of the scripture text translated into their 
several languages. So far from preparing the way for the recep- 



168 



OF THE READING- OF THE SCRIPTURES 



tion of the Christian faith they truly by this conduct cast pearls 
before swine, which is prohibited in the gospel. — St. Matthew, 
vii, 6. It is no answer for them to say that these infidels 
receive willingly and thankfully the bibles that are given to 
them, and therefore they are not the swine mentioned in the 
gospel, who, as appears from what follows in the context of the 
passage referred to, are hostile to the mysteries of the kingdom 
of God, and to the preachers of them. For, we say in reply that 
these persons, although not. hostile [to the preacher, fall suffi- 
ciently under the sentence of the gospel because they are only 
prepared to undervalue the holy thing that is presented to them, 
as the swine undervalues the pearl and tramples upon it. It is 
an undoubted fact, moreover, that the thankfulness with which 
the pagans and Mahometans have frequeutly received copies of 
the bible from the Protestant missionaries is by no means to be 
ascribed to a disposition to embrace the Christian faith, but often 
to a curiosity which led them to admire the paper, printing, 
binding, &c, of the book. — See M. Maloirs book already men- 
tioned, torn, ii, p. 448, &c. The illustrious bishop, in the place 
here specified, proves this fact from the testimony of a Mr. Mal- 
colm, an American missionary, who, among other things tells of 
some who were receiving bibles from the missionaries and were 
so impatient to examine closely their binding, that they tore the 
books in the very presence of those who gave them. It is also 
certain that the biblicals cannot point to the success of their 
missions among the pagans as a proof of the beneficial effects of 
the distribution of the bible among these people. On the sterility 
of the Protestant missions see Malou in the place last quoted. 
To prove that the advocates of bible reading of whom we speak 
expose the scripture to be treated with disrespect we need not go 
all the way to their missions among the infidels ; their conduct, 
even in calling upon all Christians to peruse the scriptures and 
judge for themselves of their meaning, whilst it is most unrea- 
sonable, is, at the same time, highly calculated to bring the 
word of God into disrespect among the people. We could not 
find better words to express briefly the folly of this conduct than 
those used by that eloquent Protestant, Edmund Burke, in " his 
speech on the acts of uniformity,'' delivered in February, 1772. 
— See the edition of his works by Rimngton, London, 1812, vol. x, 
p. 20. He says — "The scripture is no one summary of Chris- 
tian doctrine, regularly digested, in which a man could not mis- 
take his way ; it is a most venerable but most multifarious 
collection of the records of the divine economy ; a collection of 
an infinite variety — of cosmogany, theology, history, prophecy, 
psalmody, morality, apologue, allegory, legislation, ethics, car- 



IN THE YTJLGAE TONGUE. 



169 



ried through different books, by different authors, at different 
ages, for different ends and purposes. It is necessary to sort out 
what is intended for example, what only as a narrative ; what 
to be understood literally, what figuratively ; where one precept 
is to be controlled or modified by another ; what is used directly 
and what only as an argument ad hominem ; what is temporary, 
and what of perpetual obligation ; what appropriated to one state 
and to one set of men, and what the general duty of all Chris- 
tians. If we do not get some security for this, we not only per- 
mit, but we actually pay for, all the dangerous fanaticism which 
can be produced to corrupt our people and to derange the public 
worship of the country." If Mr. Burke imagined that the Pro- 
testant church could provide any security against that deplorable 
misunderstanding of the scripture, to which the people when left 
to their own feeble judgment are exposed, in that he was mis- 
taken. For, the very essence of Protestantism is the claim to 
the right of private judgment in the interpretation of scripture ; 
and were the Protestant church by any act to deny such a right 
as belonging to the people she would by the very same act pro- 
nounce herself to be an imposture. The limits of this disserta- 
tion do not permit us to enter here into a lengthened exposure 
of the folly of this Protestant principle — of the right of private 
judgment, which means — that every person has a right to take 
his faith from his own interpretation of the scripture. This 
principle naturally results in an admirable variety of creeds ; 
and if so many who adopt the principle agree in faith we can 
only explain this extraordinary fact by using the words of a Pro- 
testant archdeacon and prebendary of AVinchester : Many have 
a singular talent of seeing everything in scripture which they have a 
mind to see. — See Milner's End of Controversy, letter 8. We 
must be permitted to observe here also that there is a special 
folly and a special disregard for the respect due to the sacred 
book in insisting as the biblicals do that it shall be used as a 
school book. Let us hear on this point also a Protestant autho- 
rity quoted by Charles Butler in his letter on the perusal of the 
scriptures, published some years ago in the Birmingham Catholic 
Magazine and Review. This is Mr. Benjamin Martin, who, in 
the preface to his " Introduction to the English Tongue," cen- 
sures the " putting of the sacred book into the hands of every 
bawling schoolmistress, and of thoughtless children, to be torn, 
trampled upon, and made the early object of their aversion by 
being their most tedious task and their punishment." These 
are the words of Martin ; and Charles Butler adds, that this 
author seems inclined to ascribe the growth of irreligion and the 
contempt of holy things to this source. In fine, after what has 



170 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



been said of Christians, whether they be of mature years, or 
young and thoughtless children, it follows that there is no proof 
required to convince us that the promoters of bible societies act 
in a manner most unreasonable and most disrespectful to the bible 
when they place it, as they do, for indiscriminate perusal in the 
hands of pagans and infidels. But we must now conclude this 
dissertation with the hope that no candid reader, after perusing 
the observations which it contains, will be disposed to deny that 
there are circumstances which justify the church in imposing re- 
strictions upon the indiscriminate perusal of the scriptures by the 
people. Having admitted this he will have no difficulty in ad- 
mitting that the church has never exceeded the limits of a wise 
discretion in the matter of these restrictions. 



DISSERTATION XI. 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 

The object of biblical criticism, as we understand it here, is 
to determine by what rules we ought to be guided in pro- 
nouncing upon the authenticity or spuriousness of any word or 
passage in the sacred text about which doubts have arisen : it 
consequently teaches us how we are to proceed in our endea- 
vours to restore the text to its primitive integrity, wherever 
that integrity has been violated by interpolation or omission. 
The substantial integrity of the scriptures is abundantly proved 
by extrinsic arguments, as may be seen in any Catholic 
theological treatise on religion ; and these arguments have 
received a striking confirmation from the investigations of 
biblical criticism, which have resulted in the same conclusion, 
viz., that the substantial integrity of these sacred records is 
indisputable. — See Cardinal Wiseman's Lectures on the Con- 
nexion letween Science and Revealed Religion, lecture x. Since, 
however, God has not miraculously interposed to guard the 
scripture from those lighter errors, which through a necessity 
proceeding from human imperfection, find their way into all 
books that have been extensively circulated, and therefore 
frequently copied, hence it follows, that biblical criticism, 
besides confirming the substantial integrity of the scripture, has 
yet another task, viz., to enable us, as far as it may be possible, 
to discover these slighter errors where they exist, and to correct 
them. Tor this purpose, biblical criticism employs various 



OF BIBLICAL CKITICISlVr. 



171 



means, of which some are extrinsic to the word or passage 
which may be under consideration — others are intrinsic to it ; 
and as these means are somewhat different, as well as the 
rules to be followed in the use of them, when we speak of the 
Old Testament from what they are when there is a question 
of the Kew, therefore, we shall treat first of the criticism of 
the Old and then of the criticism of the New Testament : and in 
treating of each of these parts into which our subject is divided, 
it will be found useful to state briefly, in the first place, the 
several causes to which we are to attribute the introduction into 
the text of these slight mistakes, which it is the province of 
criticism to discover and correct. 

Speaking of the Old Testament, we must observe, in con- 
formity with what we have established in a preceding disser- 
tation, that we are not to ascribe the mistakes occurring in 
the copies of this text, (if we except one or two instances at 
the most) to any wilful intention on the part of the Jews 
of introducing a corrupt reading. These mistakes are to be 
ascribed, with the one or two exceptions to which we have 
above referred, to the error of the copyists — an error sometimes 
proceeding from inadvertence, and sometimes an error of the 
judgment. Errors through inadvertence have occurred, — First, 
by the omission of words or even sentences. Such omissions 
may be accounted for, sometimes, by homoioteleuton, that is, 
when, after a short interval, a word or phrase occurred a 
second time in a passage, the transcriber having written the 
word or phrase once, and looking again to the manuscript from 
which he was copying, happened to let the eye fall upon the 
second place where the word or phrase occurred, and finding 
there the same thing as that which he had just written, he 
thinks that he has got thus far, and continues his copy from 
that place, omitting the intermediate part. Second, through 
inadvertence, copyists have sometimes transposed a letter, a 
word, or a phrase. Third, sometimes inadvertence has led to 
the exchanging of one letter for another — of one word for 
another — and sometimes even of one phrase for another. Thus 
the eye of the copyist has sometimes confounded certain letters 
with others like them in form ; and sometimes the ear of the 
copyists, when he was writing from the dictation of another, 
confounded certain letters with others like to them in sound ; 
and hence it comes that so many various readings are trace- 
able to this interchange of the letters that are similar in form 
or in sound. Again, sometimes, from an error or memory, a 
copyist having read a word in his exemplar, and remembering 
its meaning but forgetting the very word itself, has written 



172 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



some synonymous word instead of it. By an error of memory 
also, a copyist who is familiar with, some passage parallel to 
that which he has to write, may imperceptibly glide into the 
parallel passage, mistaking what his memory suggests from it, 
for the words that are placed before him. Errors of judgment 
hare happened either — First, from the transcriber not under- 
standing certain abbreviations found in the manuscript from 
which he copied, or — Secondly, from his judging that the 
readings found in the margin of the manuscript from which he 
copied belonged to the text, from which (as he thought") they 
were excluded by some oversight. In consequence of this error 
of judgment, he would insert readings in the text which made 
no part of it. Thirdly, these errors would sometimes occur in 
consequence of a transcriber thinking that he ought, by a 
slight change, to render some passages intelligible, which with- 
out this change, were unintelligible to him. Fourthly, these 
errors have sometimes occurred from an injudicious separation 
of the words of the manuscript from which the copy was 
taken : for, as the ancient manuscripts had no division of words, it 
may have happened that a copyist sometimes mistook the true 
reading, and consequently united parts together which ought 
to have been divided ; or, on the other hand, introduced divi- 
sion where such division was inadmissible. Fifth, finally, it may 
have happened sometimes, that a copyist falsely judged that 
parallel passages, in which the same thing is related, should 
correspond in every thing, and, therefore, where he found any 
departure from this perfect similarity, he would attribute this 
to the mistake of some previous transcriber, and he would 
alter one of the passages, to restore, as he thought, the correct 
reading. Thus far for the causes which may have led to those 
errors or slight mistakes that have crept into the text of the 
Old Testament. 

We proceed now to the consideration of the means which 
criticism uses, for the purpose of discovering and removing such 
mistakes. These means, as we observed before, are either ex- 
trinsic or intrinsic. By extrinsic means, we understand all such 
means as are distinct from the consideration of the portion of 
text under discussion, when viewed in itself or in relation to 
the context in which it is found. These extrinsic means, when 
there is question of the Hebrew text, are principally — First, 
the parallel passages. Second, the manuscripts and printed 
editions of the Hebrew bible. Third, the Samaritan copy of 
the Pentateuch, and the Samaritan version of it. Fourth, the 
ancient versions taken immediately from the Hebrew. Fifth, 
the quotations of the Hebrew text occurring in the ]Sew Testa- 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



173 



ment, in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, in the 
Talmud, and in the writings of those fathers of the church who 
have referred to the Hebrew text. Sixth, the marginal readings 
or keris, which the Masora has preserved ; and finally, the 
various readings mentioned in the rabbinical writings. 

Now, as to the value of these several means, we have to 
observe — First, that parallel passages, that is, passages in which 
the same thing is found to be repeated, tend much to illustrate 
each other, as is obvious, and hence they are available frequently 
for the purpose of discovering an incorrect reading, and of 
restoring the true one. These passages are frequent in the Old 
Testament, where we often find the same thing related in more 
than one of the books — nay, sometimes in several of the books. 
Indeed the books of Kings and Paralipomenon may be said to 
consist respectively, to a great extent, of a parallel history. 
We must observe, however, that great caution is required in 
the use of this critical source of emendation. Those critics are 
not to be imitated, who appear to have thought that the sacred 
writers must have always related the same event in the same 
words. 

Second. — As for Hebrew manuscripts, they are not of the 
same critical value for the correction of the Hebrew text, as the 
Greek manuscripts are for the correction of the New Testament. 
This is in consequence of the Hebrew manuscripts being all 

modern. We have none more ancient than the tenth century 

none that are not posterior to the correction of the Hebrew 
text by the Masoretic doctors. We have spoken in a previous 
dissertation of Hebrew manuscripts. Of course, a manuscript is 
of more critical value in proportion to its age ; and here, as 
well as in Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, critics 
have admitted a certain distinction of families or classes, so 
that a reading must not be decided upon precisely by the number 
of manuscripts ; because it may be that several of these are 
mere transcripts of some one existing manuscript, and hence 
their combined testimony will not exceed the single testimony 
of their exemplar. When, therefore, a Hebrew manuscript is 
adduced in favour of some contested reading, we must first 
examine its age. This will be known, sometimes from the date 
— sometimes from the manuscript having been primitively written 
without the Masoretic points ; from the words being full, e. 
not wanting the quiescent letters, (formerly the matres lectiotiis) 
performing the function of vowels M, 71, 1, T. Critics also infer 
the antiquity of Hebrew manuscripts from the rudeness of the 
character, and paleness of the ink ; but as to these signs gene- 
rally, great caution is necessary to guard against being misled 



174 



OF BIBLICAL CELTICISM. 



by them. Of course, in proportion as more of them combine 
in favour of any manuscript, there is less danger of deception. 
Agaiu, when a manuscript is produced, we ought to examine to 
what family it belongs, and if there are many manuscripts 
adduced in favour of a reading, we must see if they all belong 
to one family, or if ail the families are represented by them. 
The Hebrew MSS,, (as we have seen before, in our dissertation 
upon them, to which we refer,) are reduced to three classes or 
families. The first class are the manuscripts of the Spanish 
Jews; the second class are the manuscripts of the Italian and 
French Jews ; and the third class are the manuscripts of the 
German Jews. Richard Simon and many other critics place the 
Spanish M.SS. in the first rank — the German in the last. Glaire 
(Introduction, torn, i,) puts the German MSS. first. As to the 
printed editions of the Hebrew text — in our dissertation on these 
(which see) we observed that there are but three primary edi- 
tions, viz., the Soncino edition of 1488, the edition in the 
Complutensian polyglot, and Daniel Bornberg's second edition — 
these, being the basis of all the others, are chiefly of importance 
in the criticism of the bible. 

Third. — Of the Samaritan text we have also treated before. 
The circumstances in which it has been preserved give an inde- 
pendent character to its testimony, which renders it of great 
value in the criticism of the Pentateuch. The Samaritan version 
of this text, which we have also mentioned before, may be use- 
fully consulted for the purposes of criticism ; as also the Arabic 
version of the same, made by Abou-Said about the twelfth cen- 
tury, although this last is far inferior in critical value to the 
preceding. 

Fourth. — The ancient versions made immediately from the 
Hebrew text are of great and obvious use in the criticism of that 
text. We have given the history of these versions already. As 
they were made from manuscripts much more ancient than any 
which wa now have, they stand at present in the place of these 
ancient manuscripts. But before using them for the purposes of 
criticism, we must examine carefully whether the version may 
not have been altered at some time — we must examine if the 
meaning of the version be clear, and whether the difference be- 
tween the version and our text might not be accounted for by 
supposing that the version departed from the usual meaning of 
the word, rather than that it found a different word in its manu- 
script. The more ancient the version is, the greater will be its 
authority (cceteris paribus) in the criticism of the text. The 
versions of principal utility in criticism are, the Septuagint, the 
Chaldaic paraphrases; especially those of Onkelos and Jonathan 



OP BIBLICAL CEITTCISH. 



175 



Ben TJzziel, the Peschito-Syriae version, the Latin Yulgate, the 
versions of Aquila, and of Symmachus, and of Theodotion — the 
fifth, sixth, and seventh Greek versions, as they are called. 

Fifth. — Criticism also avails itself, for the purpose of correct- 
ing the text, of the quotations of the Hebrew text found in the 
New Testament, in Josephus, in the works of the fathers, and in 
the Talmud. However, in the New Testament, as well as in 
Josephus, the Septuagint is for the most part quoted. The quo- 
tations of the Hebrew text found in the Talmud must be used 
with great circumspection, for the authors of that work often 
cite from memory. The Talmud is principally useful for its 
notices of various readings which had existed in the manuscripts, 
and which were changed or placed in the margin by the scribes. 
As to the fathers, scarcely any of them quote from the Hebrew, 
with the exception of Origen and St. Jerome. It appears, how- 
ever, that the other fathers cite some passages of it, as it was 
found, in the Greek characters, in the Hexapla of Origen. — See 
Glaire, Introduction, torn, i, p. 426. 

Sixth. — The marginal readings, or ken's, preserved by the 
Masora, are also very important, as they represent to us the 
readings of very ancient manuscripts, which are often preferable 
to the readings inserted in the text. Finally, the Rabbins who 
have come alter the Masora can be profitably consulted, for they 
remark upon several readings which were found in manuscripts 
of ancient times that are now lost. 

The intrinsic means, to which biblical critics have had re- 
course sometimes, for the support of the corrections of the text 
which they suggested, are — first, the connection of the discourse ; 
second, the poetical parallelism ; third, an acquaintance with the 
time, character and style of the author. There is no doubt that 
these means will be of great use in assisting us to decide upon 
the relative merits of readings upon which the extrinsic sources 
of correction are divided ; but it would appear that to alter the 
text, upon their guidance, unsupported by any extrinsic author- 
ity, would be in reality to change the text with critical conjec- 
ture as the sole guide in doing so. Now such a proceeding is 
inadmissible : for, although it might be that an error has crept 
into the Hebrew text, which no manuscript, or printed edition, 
or version, or collection of various readings, such as the Masora 
has preserved, or quotation by an ancient author, would now 
enable us to detect ; yet it is better to leave things as they are 
than, by attempting too much in the way of purifying the text, 
to introduce a principle of correction which might lead to arbi- 
trary changes. 

We come now to treat of the rules which ought to be fol- 



176 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



lowed in the application of the means to which criticism can have 
recourse for the correction of the Hebrew text. Since we do not 
admit the lawfulness of introducing any change into the text, which 
has for its sole support critical conjecture, hence our rules are only- 
laid down for the case in which the extrinsic sources of criticism 
are divided upon a certain reading. First, the great and obvious 
rule, of course, in that case is, that that reading should be pre- 
ferred which has in its favour the more weighty testimony ; and 
here, as we observed before, we are not to be guided by the 
mere number of witnesses, but we must take into account their 
antiquity, the care with which they have been preserved from 
corruption in past ages, their independence of each other. 

Second. — When the weighing of the extrinsic evidence does 
not lead to a satisfactory clearing up of the doubt, then we can 
have recourse to the intrinsic means of judging of the sound- 
ness of a particular reading in preference to another. Hence, 
in such a case, that reading will appear preferable which 
agrees better with the scope and style of the author ; which 
unites better with the context ; which does not violate the laws 
of syntax ; and which, in the poetical books, preserves the paral- 
lelism.^ 

Third. — A reading which is found in all the Hebrew MSS. 
ought not to be abandoned without necessity ; for, seeing that 
the Jews have watched with such great care over their text, it 
follows that the readings which are found in all their manuscripts 
have a very high authority. However, if the Samaritan text 
and the ancient versions should offer a contrary reading, this latter 
is to be preferred, since it has in its favour witnesses that are 
more ancient and more numerous. Hence the unanimous con- 
sent of all the Hebrew MSS. is not a rule to which we must 
always make the versions conform, whatever the Jews may say 
to the contrary, or those who, like them, believe that the present 
Hebrew text is free from faults of every kind. 

Fourth. — A reading which violates syntax must not be always 
rejected, since it maybe that this anomalous reading is an archa- 
ism, or a proverbial expression which passing into common use 
among the people, is not always strictly conformable to the rules 
of syntax. It may also be that the sacred writer himself has 
sometimes not strictly conformed to the syntax of the language 
in which he wrote — a thing which happens sometimes to the best 
writers. 

Fifth. — A reading more difficult and more obscure ought to 

* What is here meant by parallel 'ism will be fully explained in the fol- 
lowing- dissertation on Biblical Hermeneutics. 



OE BIBLICAL CKITICISM. 



177 



be sometimes preferred to the reading which is more easy and 
more clear ; seeing that the more difficult reading would not be 
likely to slip into the text with the same facility as would a 
reading that presents an easy and obvious sense — and experience, 
moreover, proves that copyists have sometimes not hesitated at 
introducing slight changes in the text for the purpose of remov- 
ing the obscurity of some passages. This is a fact which, accord- 
ing to Glaire, the Samaritan Pentateuch establishes in more than 
one passage. 

Sixth. — If necessity requires it, one may neglect the ILaso- 
retic punctuation, and the division into chapters and verses : he 
may even in such case divide or unite words otherwise than they 
are found united or divided in the present manuscripts ; because 
as all these divisions did not exist in the ancient manuscripts, it 
may be that the authors of them sometimes mistook the proper 
place of making the division. But, let it be observed that the 
necessity of which we speak here must be of a weighty character, 
proceeding, not from critical conjecture, but, for example, from 
the fact that the ancient and respectable versions, quotations by 
the fathers, &c, are opposed to the reading that is now found in 
the manuscripts under discussion. 

As to the criticism of the New Testament. It will be seen at 
once that many of the principles which we have laid down in 
the preceding part of this dissertation, are applicable to the criti- 
cism of the New Testament. Thus, the existence of mistakes in 
copies of the Greek text is to be accounted for by the same 
causes — mutatis mutandis — as those to whom we ascribed the 
introduction of mistakes into the Hebrew text. The means also 
which criticism uses for the correction of these mistakes are in 
both cases similar. Hence, in the criticism of the Greek text, 
we have recourse to the extrinsic means of correction, which are 
— First, the manuscripts and editions of the text. Second, the 
ancient versions. Third, the quotations of this text found in the 
works of the fathers of the church. To these we add, fourthly, 
the Liturgical books. Again, neither are the intrinsic means of 
judging of the purity of the text overlooked in the criticism of 
the New Testament. 

We have treated in a preceding part of this work of the 
manuscripts and editions of the Greek text. From our observa- 
tions in that place may be learned the value which, in a critical 
point of view, ought to be attached to the several manuscripts of 
the Greek text, and to the different families of manuscripts, as 
compared one with the other ; and from these preceding obser- 
vations may be also learned the relative critical value of the 
several editions of the Greek text. 



178 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



As for the ancient versions of the New Testament, the criti- 
cal value of these also may be easily inferred from the account 
which we have given of them in another place. 

The citations of the New Testament in the works of the 
fathers, and the other early ecclesiastical writers, furnish another 
excellent means of judging of the relative value of various read- 
ings ; for these early writers had an opportunity of consulting 
3ISS. much more ancient than any which we now possess. In 
consulting, however, these early writers for the true reading of 
the text we must remember that they sometimes quote from 
memory, giving the substance but not the exact words of the 
text ; at the same time, according to the best critics, it is but 
seldom, comparatively speaking, that the fathers quote from 
memory. Again, if the works which we consult have been 
written in Syriac we must remember that the scripture is there 
quoted according to the Peschito Syriac version, and consequently 
that it is to the ancient state of this version that such works 
immediately bear testimony. In like manner, should the works 
have been written in Latin, the quotations will directly and 
immediately testify to the state of the ancient Latin vulgate ; 
unless in this case and the preceding one the writer should 
declare that he follows the Greek text in his quotation. 

In the criticism of the New Testament one can consult with 
profit the ancient liturgical books wherein are contained the 
Epistles and Gospels of the year. There is also a large class of 
ancient 1LSS. containing merely those portions of the New Tes- 
tament appointed to be read on certain days in the church. 
These were called in Greek, avcty vug pur a — in Latin, Lec- 
fionaria. Those MSS/ which contained lessons from the four 
Gospels, were called EuayysX/ov, (jEvangelista/ria), while such as 
were taken from, the xlcts and Epistles were denominated 
aKocroXog, or more correctly wpa^awoaroXoi. These lectionaries 
have frequently at the commencement of their sections certain 
explanatory phrases by which we learn who it is that speaks, or 
who are they to whom the words are addressed. Of course, 
these phrases must be cautiously distinguished from the text. 
With respect to this class of MSS. generally, it is admitted that 
they are not of the same authority as other USS. of the same 
date, because the introduction of explanatory sentences appeared 
to distinguish the lectionary in some way from a regular tran- 
script of the sacred text, and hence it might happen that a copyist 
would not scruple sometimes to change a word in his lectionary. 
However, they are unquestionably of great utility in the criticism 
of that portion of the text which they contain. 

The intrinsic criteria of judging of the soundness of a parti- 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



179 



cular reading are of the same kind when we speak of the New 
Testament as those which we explained when treating of the 
criticism of the Old Testament. "We must observe, however, 
that we are not to expect here that parallelism in the construc- 
tion of the sentences which is found in the poetical books of the 
Old Testament, and which, as we observed before, furnishes one 
of the intrinsic means of judging of the correctness of certain 
readings in those books. This poetical parallelism is not to be 
looked for in the New Testament, all of which, with the excep- 
tion of a few canticles, is written in prose. At the same time we 
freely admit that the writers of the New Testament have, 
through their familiarity with the style of the Old, adopted a 
certain parallelism occasionally in the construction of their sen- 
tences, and a like construction is discernible in the discourses of 
our Eedeemer. 

It may be well to add a few words upon the rules by which 
we are to be guided in the use of these several means of purify- 
ing the text of the New Testament. In the first place, we must 
never alter the text, resting solely upon the intrinsic means of 
judging of its purity. This would be, in reality (as we ex- 
plained when treating of the Hebrew text) to alter the text 
upon mere critical conjecture. Now, if, as we showed before, 
the Hebrew text must not be changed upon such a principle, 
much less must the Greek text of the New Testament be sub- 
mitted to its operation, seeing that the materials of criticism — 
in other words, the extrinsic means of judging of the sound- 
ness of the text, are much more abundant in the latter case 
than in the former. As for the rest, the rules by which 
we are to be guided in giving a preference to one reading above 
another are quite analogous to those which have been laid down 
for the Hebrew text. The witnesses for a reading must not be 
estimated altogether by their number, we must take into account 
the character of the witnesses, their antiquity, and independence 
when viewed in relation to each other: Hence the testimony of 
a small number of MSS. which is found to contain representa- 
tives of the several families or recensions of Greek MSS. would 
outweigh the testimony of many MSS. all of which would be 
manifestly transcripts from some one exemplar appertaining to 
one of the recensions.*' Again, if we have the testimony of only 
one father of the second or third century assuring us that a cer- 
tain reading was found commonly in the MSS. of his time, such a 

* See our observations in a preceding dissertation upon the families or 
rec ensions of Greek MSS. 



180 



OP BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



reading ought to be preferred to that which all the actual MSS. 
of the Greek text would exhibit. 

When treating of the criticism of the Hebrew text, we re- 
marked upon the modern character of the divisions of that text ; 
we must also remember when there is question of the criticism of 
the text of the New Testament, that the division of that text in- 
to chapters and verses, and even the division of words, as well as 
the divisions by points and stops, and also the marking of the 
accents — have none of them been the work of the sacred writers, 
but were introduced long after their time. Hence, when there 
is a good reason for departing from these divisions in the reading 
of the text, we are at liberty to do so. However, it is well 
observed by Glaire, (Introduction, torn, i, Elemens de Critique 
Sacree) that when a passage is dogmatical, and that a different 
punctuation would change the sense, one ought to hold rigour- 
ously to the actual division of the text, in the case in which that 
division has been sanctioned by the fathers and ancient versions, 
or by the church in her liturgy. This observation of Glaire' s 
will apply also to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. 

Example. — The application of the rules of criticism which 
we have laid down shall be made more intelligible by an exam- 
ple. We select the following — In the received text of the Greek 
Testament, at the conclusion of the Lord's prayer in the sixth 
chapter of St. Matthew's gospel, we read the following words : 
on 6ov sdnv % QaGihua zxi r, dum/tug xai % do^a e/$ tou? ouoovag 
— (Eor thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever.) 
Xow, it is asked do these words form a part of the sacred text ? 
We learn from Maldonatus, in his commentary upon Matthew 
vi, 13, that, in his day, it was made a grievous charge against 
the Catholic church by several of the Reformers, that in Its ver- 
soin (for, the Yulgate has not these words) and in the prayers 
which It taught the people to say, these words were omitted. 
Let us hear now what evidence can be produced in favour of 
their authenticity. As extrinsic evidence is the great criterion by 
which one is to judge in such matters, we begin with that. And 
it would appear at first sight that the claim of this doxology to 
be considered authentic, on the ground of extrinsic evidence, is 
very strong. It has in its favour almost all the Greek manu- 
scripts. It has, moreover, the Syrian versions, both the Peschito 
and the Philoxenian. It has also lor it, the Persian, Ethiopian, 
Armenian, Gothic, and Slavonic versions. Of the fathers, it has 
in its favour St. Isidore of Pelusium, St. Chrysostom in some 
parts of his works, Theophylact and some others. As for intrin- 
sic evidence, although this is but of slight importance in biblical 



OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 



181 



criticism, the passage under consideration has none such to offer. 
For, it does not harmonize well with the context. On the con- 
trary, its insertion gives rather a harsh appearance to the refer- 
ence which the Redeemer makes from the fourteenth verse back 
to the twelfth. Nor again, has it any support from parallelism : 
for, there is no clause either going before it or following it in the 
context, whereof it could be considered the counterpart. 

Now, against the authenticity of this doxology the following 
evidence can be adduced : — First, As we have just now stated, 
the intrinsic evidence is unfavourable to it. Second, Extrinsic 
evidence is very far from being altogether on the side of its 
authenticity. Of the very ancient Greek manuscripts it has 
against it eight, including the Codex Yaticanus. There are 
other Greek manuscripts in which it is marked as doubtful. It 
has no place either in the ante-Hieronymian or Hieronymian 
vulgate. It is wanting in some other versions. Many of the 
Greek and all the Latin fathers are opposed to it. Moreover, it 
militates greatly against the authenticity of this clause that it 
should be wanting in St. Luke, where the Lord's prayer is also 
recorded ; for, it is much easier to account for its insertion in 
St. Matthew than it would be to account for its omission in St. 
Luke, if it were genuine. No good reason could be assigned for 
its disappearing from all the copies of St. Luke ; whereas, a most 
probable explanation of its insertion in St. Matthew can be ad- 
duced — It is the following. From what has been said, it appears 
that the weight of testimony in its favour is almost exclusively 
found in the Greek church. Now, it was the custom of that 
church, from a very early period, to make frequent use of doxolo- 
gies in the liturgy. With the Greek church commenced the 
practice, now so general, of adding the doxology, Glory be to the 
Father, arid to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, at 'the end of the 
psalms. And it was usual with St. Chrysostom and other Greek 
preachers to add at the conclusion of their sermons on goi sen 
xgarog tccci bo^a xai /3a<J7/.s/a, or the like. It may well be 
supposed, therefore, that these words in question got into the 
text from the liturgy. They were first, in all probability, writ- 
ten in the margin, from which they were transferred into the 
gospel through the mistakes of copyists, who imagined that 
they made part of the text. To conclude — the judgment of 
critics is decidedly opposed to the genuineness of this doxology 
in St. Matthew. Bloomfield says — " With the exception of 
Matthasi, all the more eminent editors, from Erasmus and Grotius 
down to Scholz, have rejected it." — Greek Testament with 
English notes, vol. i, p. 34. Notwithstanding the leaning which 
Scholz had to the Byzantine or Constantinopolitan family of 



182 



OF BIBLICAL HEE3IEXEUTICS. 



manuscripts, which are favourable to the genuineness of this 
doxology, yet, after weighing the evidence for and against., he 
subscribed to the judgment of those critics who rejected the pas- 
sage as spurious. He says — " Egomet cum complut. Erasmo, 
Camerario, Orotic, Millio, Bengelio, Wetsteinio, Griesbachio, 
earn ut spuriam rejeci." Novum Testamentum Greece — Textum 
recensuit Schoh, vol. i, p. 15. Having now arrived at the con- 
clusion that the doxology in St. Matthew is spurious, and makes 
no part of the Lord's prayer or of sacred scripture, we may ob- 
serve, that it must be very ancient, seeing that it is found in a 
version of such acknowledged antiquity as the Peschito-Syriac. 



DISSERTATION XII. 

OP BIBLICAL HEBMENEETICS. 



CHAPTER I. 

STATEMENT AND DIVISION OE THE SUBJECT HISTOEY 

OE BIBLICAL HEEMENEUTICS. 

Br hermeneutics is meant, as the name itself implies, {ah zofA7\v- 
svsiv,) the art of interpretation, or it may be more accurately de- 
scribed, as a practical science, by which reason is directed in dis- 
covering and expressing the sense of a writing. Like any other 
practical science, then, hermeneutics lays down the rules by 
which its end, viz. the discovery and correct statement of the 
sense of a writing, will be attained, and it demonstrates the fit- 
ness of these rules for attaining the end in question. Biblical 
hermeneutics, of which we treat, is nothing else than this science 
applied to the interpretation of the bible ; and, therefore, it fol- 
lows from what has been already said, that our subject in this 
dissertation divides itself into two parts : — in the first of which 
we shall treat of the rules by which we are to be guided in 
discovering the meaning of the scripture ; in the second, of the 
rules that are to guide us in communicating the knowledge of 
that meaning to others. 

But first, it is desirable that we should say a few words on 
the history of biblical interpretation, or hermeneutics. The 
learned TJnterkircher very well remarks, (See his Hermeneutica 
Billica Catholica, Oeniponte, 1846,) that as very distinguished 
poets have flourished before the theory of poetry was committed 
to writing, so the interpretation of the sacred scriptures was a 
long time cultivated before any one thought of collecting 



OF BIBLICAL HE RMEISTEUTICS . 



183 



together the rules of interpretation. In reality, from the very 
time that the scripture was first given to the people of God, 
provision was made for its interpretation : it belonged to the 
priests and prophets of the old law, and to all who were charged 
with the instruction of the people then, to attend to the inter- 
pretation of the sacred writings ; and when, after the captivity, 
the use of the Hebrew language began to disappear among the 
Jews, then the province of interpreter became moreover necessary, 
for the purpose of making known the contents of the sacred vol- 
ume, in a language intelligible to the people. In the time of 
Christ and the apostles, we frequently hear of scribes and doctors 
of the law — yga/ubfjLartig tofjuixoi — among whose duties it was not 
the least to explain the scripture to the people in the synagogues ; 
and this explanation was not confined to the books of the law, 
but extended to the other books, as we learn from St. Luke, iv, 
16, and following verses. Many of the Jewish interpreters of 
that period deserved censure, both on account of misapprehend- 
ing, through prejudice and negligence, the meaning of the 
oracles regarding the Messias, and on account of corrupting the 
sense of the scripture by vain human traditions, as we learn from 
the severe manner in which our Redeemer reprehends them in 
the Gospel. Among Christians, from the earliest times, to the 
reading of the scripture in the church was joined the explanation 
of what was read, or exhortation derived from it ; and wherever 
the language in which the scriptures were found was not under- 
stood by the people, translation, of course, became the first duty 
of the interpreter. Several of these explanations of scripture, or 
instructions derived therefrom, have come down to us in the 
works of the fathers, from which we learn that the fathers sel- 
dom, comparatively speaking, occupied themselves with the 
literal sense of the scripture, either in their commentaries or their 
exhortations to the people. They dwelt either upon that spiritual 
or mystical sense of the sacred oracles, of which we shall speak 
in the sequel, or they enlarged upon some' practical duty sug- 
gested by the sacred text, as is still usually done in sermons to 
the people. However, in their controversies with the heretics 
they explained well the literal sense of the text, in conforoaity 
with the laws of interpretation, to which they sometimes appeal 
expressly, mentioning at one time one law of interpretation, at 
another time another, as occasion may demand. Among the 
ancient fathers whose works have come down to us, St. Chrysos- 
tom and St. Jerome are the most distinguished for the literal in- 
terpretation of the scripture. The former, profoundly skilled in 
the Greek tongue, has explained a great part of the bible in his 
homilies to the people, in which he chiefly dwells upon the 



184 



OF BIBLICAL HEr^IZZrFXTICS. 



literal sense. These are particularly useful on the ]Sew Testa- 
ment, on account of the author's intimate acquaintance with the 
original language of that part of the bible. St. Jerome, pro- 
foundly learned in the Hebrew and Greek languages, besides 
translating so much of the Old Testament into Latin, and cor- 
recting the Xew by the original Greek, has, moreover, illustrated 
a great part of both by commentaries, in which the literal sense 
is well brought out. Contemporary with these, St. Augustine 
was the first who, as far as we know, composed a book expressly 
on the rules of interpreting the sacred scripture. This he has 
done in his four books De Doctrina Christiana. In the first 
chapter of the first book, he states in these few words what is 
required to constitute perfectly the character of the interpreter, 
" Duae sunt res, quibus nititur omnis tractatus scripturarum : 
modus mveniende, quee intelligenda sunt, et modus proferendi, quae 
intellect a sunt" There are two things upon which is based all 
explanation of the scripture ; the manner of discovering that 
which is to be understood, and the manner of expressing that 
which is understood." These books, however, treat of some 
things, which, according to the modern division of the matters 
appertaining to biblical study, do not belong to hermeneutics ; 
and we find that St. Augustine, in his own commentaries on the 
scripture, was not so much concerned about evolving the literal 
sense in conformity with the rules, as about placing before his 
readers the mystical sense, and occasionally allegorical expositions 
of the text, the nature of which we shall explain in the course 
of this dissertation. Hence, the commentaries of St. Chrysostom 
and St. Jerome are found to be more useful to the interpreter of 
scripture than those of St. Augustine. In the sixth century, 
some works appertaining to this department — of hermeneutics — 
appeared, viz. in the early part of that century E/cutyw/Jj s/s 
rag faia; ypa$ag by Adrian ; second, two books of Junilius, 
De partibus Divince legis, ad Primasium, about the year 550 ; and 
third, Aurelius Cassiodorus' book, Be Institutions Divinarum 
Liter arum, anno 563. These works, however, did not treat the 
subject with that fulness that would be desirable. For a con- 
siderable time after this, we do not find that a regular treatise of 
hermeneutics was composed ; yet, during that period, the pastors 
arjd teachers of the church were not wanting to their duty of in- 
structing the people from the sacred oracles ; whilst the scholas- 
tics, by the manner in which they have treated the scriptural 
arguments in their works, show themselves to have been well 
acquainted with the sound principles of scriptural interpretation 
to which they occasionally refer, more particularly St. Thomas 
of Aquin. 



OP BIBLICAL HEEMEJTEUTICS. 



185 



A great impulse was given to hermeneutical studies, when, 
in the year 1311, the Council of Yienne ordered that in the 
universities there should be appointed teachers of the oriental 
languages, Hebrew, Chaldaic and Arabic. These studies were 
further promoted when, in the year 1453, the occupation of 
Constantinople by the Turks drove many learned Greeks to seek 
a refuge in Italy, and when the invention of printing rendered 
books more numerous and cheaper. It is well observed by 
Unterkircher, that so far from the so-called Eeformers having 
revived biblical studies, on the contrary, the commotion, both 
civil and religious, which marked that unfortunate epoch — of the 
Eeformation — greatly retarded them. The work which may be 
justly styled the grand introduction to biblical studies in their 
present form, that is, the Complutensian polyglot, published 
through the munificent patronage of Cardinal Ximenes, made its 
appearance in the year 1517, towards the conclusion of which 
year Luther commenced the Eeformation. 

• Ko doubt, the Eeformers, or Protestants, as they are called, 
did not neglect the study of the scripture ; but before we award 
them praise on this head, we must consider the motives which 
led them to this study, and how they have succeeded in it. It 
was the great principle of the Protestant system, that the whole 
Christian doctrine was to be sought for in the scripture alone, 
and there to be learned by each Christian, without regard to the 
authority of the church. A principle so well calculated to lead 
to dissension soon produced the fruit which was to be expected 
from it. In the course of a short time the Eeformers were found 
to differ widely among themselves about the meaning of the 
scripture. As they did not admit any external authority which 
could settle these disputes, it was incumbent on each party to 
labour to establish such rules of interpretation, or such a system 
of hermeneutics, as would warrant the views which that party 
adopted in the controversy regarding the meaning of the scrip- 
ture. We see by this, how Protestants were impelled to this 
study by their principles ; and we see, at the same time, how 
unlikely it was that Protestants holding such principles would 
ever agree upon any fixed system of hermeneutics. And, in 
reality, it has so happened that Protestants have not yet agreed 
upon any fixed system of hermeneutics, nor are they at all likely 
to so agree at any future time. 

To say a few words now on their actual variations on this 
head : — early in the Eeformation the Sacramentarians, that 
they might have some appearance of reason for rejecting the eu- 
charist and other sacraments, were forced to interpret, in a tropical, 
or figurative sense, the words of Christ, which up to that time all 



186 



OF BIBLICAL HEE3IEXETJTICS. 



Christians had understood in their proper and literal sense. By 
this proceeding a new rule of interpretation was virtually intro- 
duced, viz., that a statement of scripture, no matter how clear 
and precise, might be diverted by the interpreter from its proper 
and literal sense to a figurative one, on the sole ground of its 
appearing too incomprehensible to human reason. The first 
Reformers, indeed, did not follow, in every instance, the rule 
which they themselves had introduced ; satisfied with applying 
it in some instances which they thought " would annoy the 
papacy most," they refused to adhere to it in others. The 
Socinians, however, more consistent, embraced the rule most 
cordially, and carried it out to all its consequences. Soon, origi- 
nal sin, the consubstantiality of the Word, the procession of the 
Holy Ghost, the mystery of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and 
the satisfaction of Christ, were attacked, and could not be de- 
fended in the principles of the Reformation. But the evil did 
not stop here ; the fundamental principle of the Reformers was to 
be still further carried out, and a more liberal system of hermeneu- 
tics to be introduced. — See Glaire, Introduc. torn, i, p. 535, &c. 
Down to the middle of the eighteenth century, the inspiration 
of the scripture had been respected ; but at this period Tcelner 
and Semler attacked this dogma, and with so much success, 
that it is now easy to count, upon the Continent, those Protes- 
tants who still adhere to the ancient belief. It is from the time 
at which this error commenced that we are properly to date the 
origin of what is termed the new exegesis. The principles admitted 
by the early Protestants — that the scripture of the Old and New 
Testament was the word of God — that it could contain no error 
or contradiction — that it ought to be explained by itself — these 
principles were banished from the new exegesis. Raver, in his 
hermeneutics of the Old Testament, and Hammon in his remarks 
on the hermeneutics of the New, regarded these principles as 
fruitful sources of errors, and the greatest obstacles to the under- 
standing of the scriptures. After having thus denied the inspira- 
tion of the sacred writers, they have gone still farther, and 
denied that any revelation is contained in the scripture, or that 
it is divine in any other sense except inasmuch as it contains 
moral and religious truths, and that it establishes ideas of God 
and of creation more pure and more natural than those which 
are to be found in the books of other peoples. As, however, 
this doctrine of the new interpreters could not be sustained, if the 
miracles and prophecies contained in the scripture were admitted, 
these were to be explained away by any means. The prophecies, 
according to these doctors, are either vague predictions of a more 
happy state— of a new golden age, such as are to be found in the 



OF BIBILTCAL HEP^IENErTICS. 



187 



profane poets — or, if they regard particular events, they contend 
that they were founded on a mere conjectural knowledge ; and 
where they think that this explanation will not satisfy, they 
roundly deny that the prophecy preceded the event to which it 
refers. A.s to miracles, these, they tell us, are but natural facts, 
which the credulity of Jews, or Christians, or the ignorance of 
the apostles, transformed into miracles — of these facts, the new 
exegesis, if we believe these doctors, furnishes the proper explana- 
tion. But we shall not detail the absurd impiety with which 
they labour to remove from each miracle recorded in scrip- 
ture, every vestige of the supernatural. In this unholy work 
have such commentators as Hammon, Thiess, Gabler, Flugge, 
Eckermann, Paulus, and a host of others, occupied themselves. 
One idea of these Rationalists has rendered vast service to them 
in their efforts to eliminate everything supernatural from the 
scripture narratives. They suppose that several histories in the 
scripture, such as the history of the creation, of the terrestrial 
paradise, of the fall of the first man, of the deluge, &c, are to be 
explained like the mythology of the pagan authors. Hence 
they have not been ashamed to teach that these histories turn 
no more upon realities than do the metamorphoses of Ovid. 
No doubt, other Protestant commentators on the Continent, who 
are called, for distinction sake, Supernaturalists, have opposed 
themselves to these rationalistic views. But their opposition 
has not been attended with much success, because, in quality of 
Protestants they are obliged to admit the principle established 
by Luther, that it is the right of every Christian to interpret 
the scripture for himself : behind this fundamental principle of 
the Reformation the Rationalists have always intrenched them- 
selves. Hence, it is only the true Catholic doctrine on the 
interpretation of the scripture which at once successfully com- 
bats the false principles and false views, both of the Reformers 
and of the Rationalists. Whilst on this subject we admit that 
several of these Protestant commentators, both Rationalist and 
Supernaturalist, have exhibited great learning in the illustration 
of the references to natural history, geography, ancient customs, 
and such like matters contained in the scriptures. But to ac- 
quire the knowledge of such things from their works, would be 
to purchase it too dearly, viz., at the expense of having our 
feelings constantly shocked by the doctrinal views put forward 
in their writings ; and, fortunately, it is not necessary for us to 
seek this information at so muddy a source, seeing with what 
care Catholic hermeneutics, or the true system of interpretation, 
has been cultivated. As Unterkircher remarks {Hermeneutica 
Bihlica Cat/wlica, p. 37,) in the century in which the Retor- 



188 



OP THE VARIOUS SENSES OE SCRIPTURE. 



mation broke out, several Catholic writers explained trie sound 
principles of hermeneuties as an antidote against the false prin- 
ciples advocated by the Protestants. Among these stands 
pre-eminent Sixtus Senensis, author of the Bibliotheca Sancta, 
whose work, entitled " Ars Interpretandi Scripturas Sacras 
Absolutissima" appeared at Venice in 1566. In recent times, 
when hermeneuties have been treated with more precision 
as a distinct part of the introduction to the study of scripture, 
several Catholic works have appeared upon the subject, among 
which we only refer here to a few : — First, Hermanni Gold- 
hagen, Introductio in S. Scripturam. Mogunt 1765. Second, 
Hermanni Janssens Eermeneutica, Leodii, 1818. Third, Vin- 
centii Peichel, Introductio in Hermeneuticam Bihlicam, Yiennas, 
1839. Fourth, Grlaire, Introduction... aux livres de V ancicn et du 
Xouveau Testament, Paris, 1839, torn. i. Fifth, Sermeneutica 
Biblico Catholica, edita a Casparo TJnterkircher, Oeniponte, 1846. 
Sixth, F. X. Patritii, De Interpretation Scripturarum Sacra-rum, 
lilri duo, Boniae, 1844. After this brief historical notice, we 
shall now proceed to point out the helps with which the science 
of hermeneuties furnishes us, both for discovering and for ex- 
pressing the meaning of the inspired writers : and in this dis- 
cussion we trust that a sufficient refutation will be found of 
the false principles of hermeneuties, to which we have more 
than once referred in the preceding part of this chapter. 



CHAPTER II. 

OF THE VARIOUS SENSES OF SCRIPTURE. 



First, then — On the means with which the science of hermeneu- 
ties furnishes us for discovering the sense of scripture. 

As a preliminary to this part of our subject, we must say 
something of the various senses which may be rightly attributed 
to the scripture. And here, in the very outset, we must guard 
against a confusion of ideas which might arise from mistaking 
the meaning of the expression literal sense of scripture. The 
danger of confusion proceeds from this — that the phrase literal 
sense of scripture admits of two different meanings, which must 
be carefully distinguished from each other. The literal sense of 
scripture, as it is contradistinguished from the spiritual or mysti- 
cal sense, is not the same with the literal sense of scripture as 
contradistinguished from the figurative or tropical sense. Lite- 



OF THE VARIOUS SENSES OF SCE1PTTJEE. 



981 



ral sense in this latter acceptation, is termed by some the gram- 
matical sense ; others give it a different name. But, attention to 
the following explanation will guard us against any confusion of 
ideas respecting this matter. The literal sense of the scripture, as 
distinguished from the my stical or spiritual sense, is that sense which 
the speaker or writer intends proximately and directly to con vey. No w 
the sense which the speaker or writer intends proximately and 
directly to convey will be often based upon a tropical or figurative 
acceptation of the words which he uses. On the other hand, the 
literal sense of the scripture, as distinguished from the figurative 
or tropical sense, is the sense which the words, in their proximate 
usual meaning, would convey. From this statement we perceive 
at once that, when the language of the speaker or writer is not 
tropical, then — and only then, are these two literal senses identi- 
fied. All this shall become more clear by an example. Take 
the words of the Baptist, used by him in pointing out our Divine 
Eedeemer — " Behold the Lamb of God." — John, i, 29. The 
literal sense of these words, as distinguished from any mvstical 
sense which they might have, is that sense which the Baptist 
intended proximately and directly to convey to those who heard 
him : yet this sense is based upon a tropical use of the word lamb. 
If the Baptist had been understood to use these words in that 
literal sense which would exclude the use of any trope or figure, 
then he would have been understood to point to some real lamb. 
Again, when we contend that the prophecies respecting the glory 
of Solomon's reign have a higher sense than the literal sense — 
there we take literal sense, as distinguished from the mystical 
sense of these prophecies, which is verified in Christ — the mvs- 
tical Solomon. But when we contend, against the Sacramenta- 
rians, that the words of the institution of the Eucharist — " This 
is my body " — are to be taken in their literal sense, there we 
take literal sense as distinguished from tropical or figurative sense. 
Having now explained the twofold meaning of the expression 
literal sense of scripture, we have only to add that, throughout 
this dissertation, we always use the expression literal sense as it 
is distinguished from mystical or spiritual sense, unless where 
the reader is expressly warned that such is not our meaning. If 
the scripture were a mere human composition there would be no 
question of any sense besides the literal. But, as St. Thomas 
says — " Auctor scripturae sacrse est Deus, in cujus potestate est, 
ut non solum voces ad significandum acconiniodet, sed etiam res 
ipsas — 111a ergo prima significatio, qua vcces significant res, per- 
tinet ad primum sensum, qui est sensus historicus vel literalis. 
Ilia vero significatio, qua res significatae per voces, iterum res 
alias significant, dicitur sensus spirit ualis, qui super literalem 



190 OF THE TAEIOrS SEXSES OF SCRIPTURE. 

fundatur, eumque supponit," — that is, " The author of the sacred 
scripture is God, in whose power it is, not only to accommodate 
words to signify things, but also to make the things themselves 
significative. That first signification, therefore, "by which the 
words signify things, belongs to the first (or primary) sense, 
which is historical or literal. But that signification by which 
the things signified by the words again signify other things, is 
called the spiritual sense, which is founded upon, and supposes, 
the literal sense.' ' — Sumnrae, p. i, q. 1, art. 10. That, besides 
the literal sense this second sense, denominated by St. Thomas 
the spiritual, is to be admitted in the scripture is manifest from 
the New Testament itself, where this spiritual sense of the Old 
is frequently adduced. — See St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, 
and other parts of the New Testament. 

We lay it down in the first place that all parts of the scrip- 
ture have a literal sense, and, consequently, even those parts 
which have a spiritual sense : in reality this must be immediately 
admitted, seeing, as St. Thomas accurately observes in the pas- 
sage which we have already quoted from his sum, that the spiri- 
tual sense is founded upon the literal. — See Patrizi, De Interpre- 
tation Scrip, torn, i., p. 9. 

Another question, however, there is, which is much disputed 
among interpreters of the scripture, viz., whether any passage of 
scripture has more than one literal sense. Estius, in one of his 
Orationes Theologicce] — the 19th, which is on this point, informs 
us that before his time this question had not been treated ex pro- 
fesso by any one. He says that he himself was inclined rather to 
"deny that the scripture had in any place more than one literal 
sense ; although he admits that almost all the theologians and 
interpreters up to the time at which he spoke, in 1612, wherever 
they touched upon the matter, admitted that the same place of 
scripture might have more than one literal sense. In holding to 
this assertion — he informs us — that they were greatly influenced 
by the authority of St. Augustine and St. Thomas, who were 
considered by them to have held this opinion. So general, 
indeed, was the opinion in favour of more than one literal sense 
in parts of the scripture before the time of Estius that he informs 
us in this same discourse that Dominick Bannes declared it to be 
rash to reject it. However, since the days of Estius numerous 
and learned interpreters have not hesitated to lean to the other 
opinion : among recent writers may be mentioned Glaire, Unter- 
kircher, Patrizi. This question is treated most profoundly by 
the learned professor of scripture and oriental languages in the 
university of Louvain, John Theodore Beelen, who has, in fact, 
exhausted the subject. Tor our own part, as the limits of this 



OE TBE TARIOUS SENSES OF SCEIPTT7EE. 191 

chapter will not allow us to dwell longer on this point, we have 
no hesitation in subscribing to the conclusion of Professor Eeelen 
who thus writes in the proemium of his Bissertatio Theologica on 
this subject, printed at Louvain, in 1845 : " Istius autem inqui- 
sitionis exitus is fuit, ut nunc mini certissimum sit, non esse ullo 
sat firmo argumento hactenus probatum, unius ejusdem que scrip- 
ture loci literales sensus plures quam unum alicubi esse agnos- 
cendos." " The result of this inquiry has been that it is now to 
me most certain that no argument has yet been advanced suffi- 
ciently strong to prove that one and the same passage of scrip- 
ture has anywhere more than one literal sense." So far for the 
literal sense. 

We come now to the spiritual or mystical sense, by which we 
understand that more profound sense which lies concealed under 
some type, which type is manifested by the literal sense. "We 
must admit, as it has been already observed, that this mystical 
sense is to be found in divers parts of the scripture. The ancients 
subdivided this sense into the allegorical, the tropological (or 
moral), and the anagorical ; hence these well known verses : — 

" Litter a gesta docet, quid credas Allegoria ; 
Moralis quid agas ; quo tendas Axagogia." 

We see by these words, as well as by the explanations appended 
to them by the ancient expositors, that the allegorical sense meant 
that mystical sense which has reference to the church upon 
earth — or, in other words, to faith, which after this life is 
changed into vision. The tropological refers to moral conduct — 
the analogical refers to the church in its glorious state — that is in 
heaven : but we shall not embarrass the matter of which we treat 
by attending to this subdivision, but we shall simply speak of 
the mystical sense, which includes the three. 

It has been asked, whether or not all the scripture has, 
besides its literal sense, a spiritual or mystical sense also : upon 
which point some have embraced an extreme opinion, asserting 
that all parts of scripture have such a sense — these are called 
figurists. Their opinion is refuted by considering the very 
nature of the mystical sense — for, as it is well said by St. 
Thomas in the words already quoted from his sum, " That sig- 
nification, by which the things signified by the words again signify 
other things, is called the spiritual sense, which is founded upon 
and supposes the literal sense." According to this most correct 
notion of the mystical sense we see that it is only in those parts 
of scripture where that which is expressed according to the 
literal sense is a type of something else, that the mystical sense 
is found. Hence we perceive at once, as Professor Patrizi 



192 



OF THE YAEIOTJS SENSES OF SCRIPIUEE. 



observes, that all those parts of the New Testament which, 
according to the literal sense regard the church after its complete 
introduction on the day of Pentecost, have no mystical sense, 
because what is said literally of the church from that time for- 
ward is not typical of future things. Hence it would be vain to 
seek for the mystical sense, for example, of the epistles of St. 
Paul. It is, moreover, the common doctrine of interpreters that 
that is an extreme and unfounded opinion which holds that the 
entire of the Old Testament has a mystical sense ; because, 
although the Old Testament was typical of the New, and hence 
we are justified in inferring that its rites and sacrifices, and that 
various ordinances of the old law, pointed, in their mystical sig- 
nification, to certain things in the new law ; it by no means 
follows that we are to admit a mystical sense in the entire scrip- 
ture of the Old Testament. It is going to an opposite extreme, 
on the other hand, to contend that there is no mystical sense to be 
admitted in the scripture of the Old Testament, unless in those 
passages which are quoted in a mystical sense in the New. The 
defenders of this opinion are called anti-figurists. We justly 
term this opinion extreme and unreasonable ; because, seeing 
the manifest connexion which exists between the Old and the 
New Testament as between type and anti-type, it appears quite 
unreasonable to suppose that all the mystical references to the 
New Testament that are contained in the scripture of the Old 
are to be found in that comparatively small number of quotations 
above referred to. 

As to the question regarding the use of the mystical sense in 
theological arguments, there is no doubt but the mystical sense 
supplies a solid argument : hence we find that Christ and the 
apostles in the New Testament have argued from it. Again, 
since the mystical sense wherever it is found must have the Holy 
Ghost for its author, as well as the literal sense, it is not lawful 
to question the solidity of the argument which is based upon it. 
However, in practice, theological arguments must be principally 
drawn from the literal sense of the scripture. For, it is only 
when the mystical sense is certain that a conclusive argument 
can be taken from it. Now this sense is indeed certain when 
the scripture itself points it out ; as happens in those texts of 
the Old Testament which are quoted in the mystical sense in the 
New. In other places it is not easy to arrive with certainty at 
this sense ; and if the adversary should call in question the 
existence of such a sense in any particular passage we cannot 
convince him of its existence by the same hermeneutical means 
which enables us to demonstrate the literal sense of the passage. 
However, in its proper place we will not omit to point out th 



OF THE VARIOUS SENSES OF SCRIPTURE. 



193 



means by which the commentator is enabled to perceive this 
mystical sense. For the present we shall conclude this point 
with the observation of a learned Catholic theologian — Molina — 
' ( that, although each of those spiritual senses, where they are 
not so certain, will furnish only a probable argument for the 
confirmation of the faith, yet that the harmony of so many 
figures of the Old Testament by which the things of the New 
have been so vividly delineated and expressed, supplies an argu- 
ment of no slight importance for confirming the faith, and one 
which can be used even against the infidels." 

We come now to say a few words of the Accommodations s 
Scriptures and Allegoremata ; in other words, applications of scrip- 
ture texts or passages to subjects of which the scripture in those 
places does not treat either in its literal or mystical sense ; and 
Allegorizing interpretations of scripture. The first of these, that 
is, the application of the scripture to something of which there is not 
question in the passage quoted, either in the literal or mystical sense 
of that passage is called by some the sense by accommodation — 
sensus accommodatus or accommodatitius ; but improperly, inas- 
much as it is not the sense of the scripture at all. The nature 
of this application of scripture requires not many words to explain 
it. It is that to which preachers constantly have recourse in 
their sermons; and such application is not only allowable but 
highly useful and edifying, when kept within its proper limits. 
There are two ways in which this adaptation of the words or 
sentences of scripture may be made. One, by extending the sig- 
nification of the word or passage to some matter like to that of 
which the scripture there speaks, as, for example, if one should 
excuse his fault by saying, in the words of Eve, " the serpent 
deceived me; — Gen. iii. 13 — or, if one should bewail his loss of 
sight by saying with Tobias, " What joy shall I have who sit in 
darkness, and see not the light of heaven ? " — Tobias, v, 12. The 
other way of making this adaptation of the scripture is, when by 
the words of the scripture we convey an allusion to some subject 
quite different from, or unlike to that of which the scripture that 
is quoted really treats ; as, for example, if one, by quoting the 
words of the Psalm (xvii, 27,) " with the holy man thou shalt 
be holy," intended to point out the beneficial effects of good 
company ; whereas the Psalmist really addresses these words to 
God ; and their true sense is that with the good and merciful 
man God will show himself kind and merciful. It is obvious 
that of these two modes of applying the scripture the first is 
much to be preferred. In fact, the second mode cannot be used 
without the greatest caution, and never without some reasonable 
foundation for the allusion ; as, otherwise, the application of the 

o 



194 



Or THE VARIOUS SENSES OE SCRIPTURE. 



text would be absurd, and consequently irreverent towards the 
scripture. 

It is asked, whether or not the inspired writers have ever 
quoted the scripture in this way of adaptation, or per aceom moda- 
tionem. Some interpreters of scripture deny that the scripture 
is ever thus quoted by an inspired writer ; they say that the 
quotation is always adduced either in the literal or mystical sense 
of the passage cited : however, several learned and orthodox 
commentators have no difficulty in admitting that the writers of 
the New Testament sometimes quoted from the Old in this 
manner — per accommodationem. Thus, many say that what Moses 
said of legal justice in Deuteronomy (c. xxx,) is adapted by St. 
Paul to Evangelical justice. — Koreans, x, 6, and following verses. 
They produce also some other instances of this manner of quot- 
ing the Old Testament in the New. But these interpreters 
justly observe that this manner of quoting is very rare in the 
scripture, and that the form of citing on these occasions is never 
such as would imply that the passage is adduced in its real signi- 
fication. Hence, we must not admit that the scripture is merely 
cited for the purpose of adaptation, when the sacred writer intro- 
duces the quotation by such words as. Thus God says, or, The 
scripture says, or, In order that the scripture might be fulfilled, 
because the sacred writer by saying any of these things of the 
words cited gives us to understand that he adduces the passage 
in the sense which really belongs to it in that place from which 
he quoted it. Again, if the object of the sacred writer in the 
place where the quotation is introduced is to confirm same truth 
of faith, we may conclude that the words are not quoted in that 
adapted sense of which we speak ; seeing that it must be the real 
sense of the text that is adduced when there is question of prov- 
ing anything by scripture. 

By an allegorizing interpretation of scripture is understood the 
attributing to anything related in scripture a certain symbolical 
signification, which, that it was really intended by the Holy 
Ghost — the author of the scripture — no sufficient reason induces 
us to think. For example, if what is said in Leviticus (xiii,) 
about avoiding the society of those infected with leprousy, one 
would explain as symbolically signifying that the society of 
heretics should be avoided. Several of the ancient fathers have 
been much given to this manner of explaining scripture, and in 
their hands it has been attended with great edification to the 
faithful. Doubtless, it requires to be used with great caution, 
and it must not be confounded with the allegorical sense of scrip- 
ture ; although these allegorizing interpretations of scripture are 
sometimes improperly called the allegorical sense: The allegorical 



OP THE HERMENETTTICAL CRITERIA, ETC. 



195 



sense, we have seen already, is one of the sub-divisions of the 
mystical or spiritual sense of scripture, which, wherever it exists 
in the scripture, was as truly intended by God — the author of 
the sacred records. — as the literal sense ; whereas, these allego- 
rizing interpretations are not put forward as being in reality the 
sense of the scripture at all, but as mere adaptations of the scrip- 
ture narrative in a symbolical manner. 

Having said so much of the senses of the scripture, both real 
and adapted, it remains to say a few words of that sense which 
it has been in these latter times so much the fashion among the 
Eationalists of Germany falsely to ascribe to the scripture. We 
refer to what they call the mythical sense, sensus mythicus. The 
fivQoc is an allegorical fable, invented to explain the existence 
of some fact, or to convey some moral. The metamorphoses of 
Ovid may be referred to as examples of the pvdoi. ]Sow, the 
Eationalists contend that the scripture contains these vvdoi or 
myths ; and they say, moreover, that what has happened to other 
peoples with respect to their ancient books has happened to the 
Jews and Christians respecting the scripture, viz., that in pro- 
gress of time these f^'oQoi have been themselves mistaken for 
facts ! ! ! Of course, it is unnecessary to observe, that it is a 
glaring impiety to attribute any such sense as this to the Word 
of God. But we shall hcve more to say of these men before 
concluding this dissertation. 



CHAPTER III. 

OF THE HERMENEUTICAL CEITEKIA OF THE LITERAL SENSE 
OF SCRIPTURE. 

We proceed now to explain the hermeneutical helps by which 
we are enabled to discover the literal sense of the scripture : 
afterwards we shall add a few words on the means of arriving at 
the mystical sense. 

The authority of the church is, of course, the chief guide to 
the Catholic in the investigation of the sense of the scripture. 
That this is most reasonable we shall show hereafter when about 
to conclude these observations on the hermeneutical criteria. It 
is in consequence of this principle that Catholic biblical herme- 
neutics is not a system of ever-varying rules resulting in diversity 
of opinion (or belief, if you so call it) on the most important 
matters contained in the scripture. At the same time in the 
Catholic church none of the hermeneutical criteria is by any 
means overlooked. It is only required (and that most reasonably) 



196 



Or THE HEBMENETJTICAI CEITEEIA 



that no one will, in consequence of his presumed acquaintance 
with any hermeneutical rule or rules, consider himself to be inde- 
pendent of the church's guidance in this manner of the investiga- 
tion of the sense of scripture. 

We shall begin now with the consideration of that hermeneuti- 
cal criteria of the sense, which is termed the asus loquendi, or usage 
of language. In orderto discover themeaning of any writer we must 
learn the sense of the words which he uses ; and, if we are careful 
not to go astray in learning the sense of the words, we must make 
ourselves acquainted with the meaning which the people among 
whom the language prevailed were accustomed to attach to these 
words. We see, then, at once, of what importance- it is to attend to 
the mas Ioquendi, or the usage of language, prevailing among the 
people to whom the language of the writer was familiar. And 
since the usage of language is variable, so that people who speak 
the same language as their ancestors do not always attach to 
words the same sense which their ancestors attached to them, it 
becomes necessary, then, for one who wishes to understand a 
writer to make himself acquainted with the usage of language 
which prevailed at the time at which he wrote ; since it is to be 
presumed that any one writing in a living language writes in 
such a way as to be understood by the people ol his own time. 
This usage of language must be consulted, not only for the pur- 
pose of knowing the literal or grammatical sense of words and 
phrases, but also for the purpose of learning their figurative or 
topical sense. Since, on the same obvious principle that an 
author who writes in a living language writes with a view to be 
understood by those who speak that language, we infer that he 
cannot be supposed to use words or phrases in such a figurative 
sense as the usage of the people among whom the language pre- 
vailed never attached to them. We see now how important it is 
to the interpreter of scripture to make himself acquainted with 
the biblical usage of language — in other words, with the usage of 
language as regards the original languages of the sacred records. 
The original language of much the greater part of the Old Testa- 
ment is Hebrew ; Chaldaic is the original of a part of it, and Greek 
of another part. In the ±N"ew Testament the original language 
is Greek if we except the Gospel oi St. llatthew, and, according 
to some, the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, which, they 
say, was written like St. Matthew's gospel in Syro-Chaldaic, or 
that Aramean dialect of the Chaldaic which was spoken in Pales- 
tine in the time of the apostles. 

First, then, with respect to the usage of the Hebrew language 
—since, in truth, the only ancient Hebrew book which we have 
ia me Eible itself — it follows, that the great help which we now 



Or THE LITERAL SENSE OF SCRIPTURE. 



197 



have towards acquiring a knowledge of the Hebrew usage of 
language is the attentive perusal of the whole Hebrew, scripture. 
By means of this we are enabled to compare one part with 
another ; and thus to bring to the examination 6f passages, when 
the signification of certain words is doubtful, that light which is 
afforded by other passages where the signification of the same 
word is clearly manifested. 

Another great help which we have towards discovering the 
usage of the Hebrew language is the study of the cognate 
dialects — Chaldaic, Syriac, Arabic. Although Chaldaic and 
Syriac approach more nearly to the Hebrew than Arabic does, 
yet this latter has this advantage, that it is still the spoken lan- 
guage of a numerous people, and that the books written in it are 
many. 

Another help in the study of this usage of the Hebrew 
language is furnished by the ancient versions, particularly the 
Septuagint. Of course, before undertaking to discover by the 
means laid down the usage of the Hebrew language, one ought to 
make himself well acquainted with the Hebrew grammar. 
Hebrew grammars and lexicons have been made with the help, 
first, of the traditional interpretation of the Hebrew scripture ; 
secondly, with the help of the knowledge of the cognate dialects ; 
thirdly, with the help of ancient versions, that is, the Septuagint, 
Chaldaic paraphrases, and such other ancient keys to the know- 
ledge of the bible, or any part of it, as were known when Hebrew 
grammars and lexicons were first constructed in that order in 
which we now find them. 

As to the Chaldaic portions of the Old Testament, the inter- 
preter of scripture will make himself acquainted with the usage 
of the language in which these are written in the like manner : 
first, by an attentive perusal of all this part of the scripture ; 
secondly, by the study of the Chaldaic paraphrases, which, 
although written at a much later period than those portions of 
the bible, will yet throw considerable light upon the usus loquendi 
or usage of the scripture Chaldaic; thirdly, by means of the 
cognate dialects and ancient versions. 

As for the books of the Old Testament which were originally 
written in Greek, whatever shall be said of the nature and usus 
loquendi of the Greek of the New Testament will be applicable 
to them; since the biblical Greek is all of the same kind. Com- 
ing then to the New Testament, we may observe in the first place 
that since the original of that part of it which was written in the 
Syro- Chaldaic has now disappeared, we need not dwell on the 
investigation of the usage of that Syro-Chaldaic dialect. At the 
same time it is manifest that it will not be without its utility even 



198 



OF THE HEEMENETJTICAL CEITEEIA 



in the study of the other scriptures, to make ourselves acquainted 
with this peculiar dialect, which was commonly spoken in the 
time of Christ and his apostles by the Jews of Jerusalem and 
Palestine generally. We may learn it by the help of ancient 
Jewish writings in this dialect (such as the Talmud of Jerusalem, 
from which Lightfoot has drawn several useful observations, 
tending to throw light on the New Testament in various places), 
and by the study of the other Semitic dialects. 

"We come now to consider, how we are to learn the usage of 
language in reference to that biblical Greek, in which almost the 
whole of the New Testament, and a portion of the Old, have 
been written. When Alexander the Great, about three hundred 
and thirty years before Christ, established the Grecian monarchy 
over the east, then it was that Greek and Gentile became syn- 
onymous among the Jews. Those Jews who lived out of Pales- 
tine, in other parts of the Grecian monarchy, or of the provinces 
into which it was divided after the death of Alexander, were 
called Hellenist Jews ; the Jews of Palestine retaining the name, 
for distinction sake, of Hebrew Jews. These Hellenist Jews 
spoke the Greek language as their vernacular tongue, but not 
with the classic purity of the ancient Greeks. Prom these Jews, 
that Greek, which was spoken in the east under the monarchy 
of Alexander the Great and afterwards, and in which the Greek 
books of the bible were written, is denominated Hellenistic 
Greek. Even in Greece itself, the usage of the language had 
now undergone a change ; words were introduced into common 
use, or ancient words had meanings attached to them, which were 
seldom or never to be met with in the ancient classics. But, the 
Hellenistic biblical Greek admitted, moreover, some words, and 
significations of other words, which were derived from the 
Hebrew language and its dialects. And, in considering the usage 
of that biblical Greek language in which the books of the New 
Testament are written, we must not forget that some words and 
phrases must be taken in that sense which is conformable to the 
peculiar Christian use of the language. Por, the Christian re- 
ligion partly introduced new ideas, and partly elevated former 
ones to a greater perfection : it moreover introduced new insti- 
tutions in regard to sacred rites and offices in the church, &c. 
Now it was necessary that the first Christians — and the authors, 
therefore, of the books of the New Testament — should use new 
and peculiar forms of speech to express these new and peculiar 
notions. This is what we here mean by the Christian use of 
language. 

Well, then, in order to acquire a knowledge of the usage 
of the language as regards the Hellenistic Greek, in which 



OP THE LITERAL SENSE OF SCRIPTURE. 



199 



nearly all the Kew Testament, and a portion of the Old, were 
written, we have various helps : — First, The attentive perusal 
of the entire of this part of the scripture. Second, The study of 
the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, which is written in 
Hellenistic Greek. Third, The fragments of the other Greek 
versions, which were edited in Origen's Hexapla, L e. the ver- 
sions of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and the others. 
Fourth, The Apochryphal Greek hooks, both of the Old and the 
New Testament. Fifth, The writings of the Apostolic Fathers. 
Sixth, Since the sound knowledge of classical Greek is so neces- 
sary a qualification for interpreting any book that is written 
properly in the Greek tongue, it follows, as a matter of course, 
that the interpreter of the New Testament cannot overlook the 
study of the Greek classics. At the same time, the study of such 
classic authors as approach nearer to the time of the apostles, will 
be of special service, in making us acquainted with the usage of 
the language in which these sacred penmen wrote. The follow- 
ing authors, therefore, may be read with peculiar advantage : 
Polybius, Diodorus Siculus, Arrianus, and Herodian. But out- 
side of the range of the early Christian writings, which have for 
their direct object the interpretation of the scripture, there are 
no authors who will be of such utility in this matter as 
Philo and Josephus. The time at which these wrote — the people 
to which they belonged — their acquaintance with the ancient 
scriptures — all these circumstances combine to render their 
writings of the greatest value in illustrating the usage of the 
biblical Greek language. From what has been observed before, 
respecting the Hellenistic Greek, it is obvious that a knowledge 
of the Hebrew and its dialects will be of vast importance to the 
interpreter of the Greek scriptures. Finally, as to that Christian 
usage of language of which we spoke, and the knowledge of 
which is necessary for the understanding of the Greek scriptures 
of the New Testament, this will be learned from the early Chris- 
tian writers — in the first place, from the interpreters of the 
scriptures, and from the ancient versions : then, from the writings 
of the Fathers, &c. 

Having said so much now of this important criterion of the 
sense of scripture — the usage of language, we must be permitted 
to observe, that its importance has been overrated by several 
Protestant writers on hermeneutics, particularly on the Conti- 
nent. In fact, if their placits were admitted, it would follow 
that in all the difficulties to be met with in the interpretation of 
the scripture, the supreme decision rests with the grammarians, 
that their theory is unsound is sufficiently manifest from the 
results to which it has led : first, interminable dissensions about 



200 



t 

OF THE HERMEXEFTICAL CRITERIA 



the application of their rules ; and, secondly, in many cases, the 
setting aside of the obvious and natural sense to make way for 
some erudite conception of the grammarians which yields but a 
frigid sense, that, even at first sight, appears manifestly foreign 
to the scope of the writer, and to the whole context. No : we 
must cautiously guard ourselves against supposing that the 
grammarians are the supreme arbiters in this matter of the sense 
of scripture. The Catholic church, whilst it impresses upon those 
who are charged with the explanation of the scripture the im- 
portance of making themselves well acquainted with this usage 
of language, wisely reminds them, at the same time, that they 
are to use this help to the understanding of scripture with a 
due submission to that supreme authority of the church, consti- 
tuted for the purpose of preserving the unity of faith among the 
members of Christ's mystical body. We have said enough on 
this point ; but if our limits permitted it we could show, more- 
over, that the adversaries with whom we are here at issue have 
much overrated the helps which the cognate dialects furnish 
towards the understanding of the Hebrew usage of language ; 
and since it is natural to suppose that the style of the writers of 
the New Testament is strongly characterised by a Hebrew turn 
of expression, hence it follows that what is here said of the 
Hebrew usage of language, is not without its applicability to 
the New Testament itself. Now, I am aware, that in the begin- 
ning of the last century, Albert Schultens, and many others 
influenced by his opinions, appeared to think that the Arabic 
language, with the copious works written in it, left nothing to 
be desired by any one who wished to be introduced to a perfect 
knowledge of the Hebrew language and phraseology. Shultens' 
school, however, is, in latter times, much diminished, and not 
without reason. In reality, the Arabic is more removed from 
the Hebrew idiom than either the Syriac or the Chaldaic ; and 
not one of these, nor altogether, can be considered an infallible 
guide to the knowledge of the Hebrew usage of language : Eirst, 
Because the etymology of words, particularly when the roots 
are to be found in a different language or dialect, is far from 
being a safe guide to the knowledge of the meaning which' 
usage gives to the derivatives. This every one, who has devoted 
ever so little time to the comparative study of languages, must 
know full well. Secondly, Because all these dialects have under- 
gone important changes since the time when the Hebrew was a 
living language. Now, it is evident, that according to the extent 
of these changes, to the same extent will these dialects become less 
useful to us in our search after the Hebrew usage of language, 
which was contemporary with the authors of the Hebrew books. 



OF THE LITEEAL SENSE OF SCEIPTTJRE. 



201 



"We can trace these changes in Chaldaic — first, in the difference 
between the ancient Chaldaic, in which, portions of the scripture 
are written, and the earliest of the Chaldaic paraphrases ; and 
again, in the difference of style and language between the early 
paraphrases and those of a later date. With respect to all these 
dialects, Chaldaic, Syriac, and that peculiar dialect which was 
spoken in Judea in the time of our Redeemer, and which may 
be looked upon as a kind of compound of these two, and hence 
it is often styled Syro-Chaklaic, otherwise Aramean— as to all 
these, I say, the monuments of them which exist all bear testi- 
mony to that progressive change. All these, it may be said, 
have long since ceased to be living languages. Hence, in this 
matter, the great stress is laid upon the Arabic, on account of 
its copiousness, the many works written in it, and the fact, that 
it is still the spoken language of a numerous people. But neither 
has the Arabic been exempt from the vicissitudes to which all 
living languages are liable. The Arabians of the present day 
are far from speaking the language of the Koran ; and if such 
has been the change in this language during the twelve cen- 
turies which have elapsed since the writing of the Koran, are 
we to admit, without any proof, that during a period of almost 
twelve centuries which intervened between the Babylonian cap- 
tivity and the writing of the Koran, the Arabic language con- 
tinued fixed and immutable? It is no wonder, then, that a 
more mature reflection has withdrawn many from that admira- 
tion with which the views of Albert Schultens were at first 
received. 

Having said so much of the Biblical usage of language, we 
now proceed to discuss the other hermeneutical criteria of the 
sense of scripture. For, even if we had become perfect masters 
of the biblical usage of language, yet, since in all languages, 
several words are used in various meanings and various shades 
of meaning, according to the circumstances in which they are 
applied, hence it becomes necessary for him who would discover 
the exact meaning of scripture, to invoke the aid of these ad- 
ditional hermeneutical means of determining the sense. At some 
of these criteria we arrive by a close inspection of the sacred 
writings themselves, and these are called the internal criteria of 
the sense. Some other of these criteria are derived from certain 
circumstances, which are more or less extrinsic to' the sacred 
Word itself, and these are called the historical or external criteria 
of the sense. Finally, the remaining hermeneutical means of 
arriving at the sense are drawn from the dogmatical laws of 
interpretation. 

The, internal criteria of the sense are, first, the context — 



202 



OF THE HERMENEUTICAX CRITERIA 



second trie parallelism. By the context we understand the con- 
junction and mutual relation of the thoughts expressed by a speaker 
or writer: In interpreting any author it is of the greatest im- 
portance to attend well to the context, as it is admitted on all 
hands that a sense which would be opposed to the context, cannot 
be the sense intended by the author. On the other hand, how- 
ever, it must be observed, that a sense might agree with the 
context, and still not be the sense intended ; since, not only the 
words of an author, but sometimes even long sentences, may 
admit a sense of which he never thought when writing them. 
But, if only one sense should be found to suit the context, then 
that indeed must be the true sense. There are various kinds of 
contexts, according as the foundations are different upon which 
this connexion between the thoughts of the writer is based. 
Sometimes the connexion is founded upon the logical principles 
by which thought and its expression are regulated, and this is 
termed the logical context. Sometimes the connexion is founded 
upon the association of ideas — and to this some give the name 
of the psychological context. Sometimes the connexion is based 
upon the historical or chronological relation which the events 
that are narrated bear to each other — this is called the historical 
context. Sometimes, in fine, the context is of a mixed character, 
in consequence of the connexion between its parts b^ing based 
upon more than one foundation. So much for the various kinds 
of context. Again, the context is divided into the proximate 
and remote. The proximate appertains to the series and mutual 
relation of the notions expressed in the same sentence ; the remote 
is extended to many sentences, which, however, are united by 
some thought which forms a common bond between them. 

A knowledge of the logical context will be found to serve our 
purpose when we are engaged in the interpretation of dogmatical 
statements, or of the argumentative portions of the scripture. 
"When there is question of simple statements, we shall be guided 
in the interpretation by attending, in conformity with sound 
logical principles, to the subject of the assertion or proposition on 
the one hand, and to the attribute or predicate on the other ; at 
the same time paying due regard to the relation existing between 
them in the passage of which there is question. Again, when 
engaged in the interpretation of a connected argument, or chain 
of reasoning, we must in the first place discover the thesis, or the 
assertion which the sacred writer is proving or illustrating. 
This we will discover with the help of our logical rules, and by 
attending, moreover, accurately to the manner in which the 
argument or reasoning is introduced, and to the consequences 
inferred from it. Having discovered the thesis of the sacred 



OF THE LITERAL SENSE OE SCRIPTURE. 



203 



writer in the passage under consideration, then we have the key- 
to the whole logical context. But, upon the * nature of the 
logical context we need dwell no longer, seeing that Catholic 
theological students, for whom our labour is principally under- 
taken, are perfectly grounded in the sound principles of logic — 
a science which has been always taught in our Catholic ecclesi- 
astical schools with a fulness and an accuracy which would be 
in vain sought for elsewhere. 

The psychological context (as some term it), is found there, 
wherever the connexion of the discourse is based upon the as- 
sociation of ideas ; for, since the association of ideas is accounted 
for by certain psychological laws, hence this gets the name of 
the psychological context. An acquaintance with the nature of 
this kind of context is of great importance for the right under- 
standing of the scriptural imagery ; and under the head of 
imagery we here include all these figures of speech, by means of 
which an idea, or train of ideas, is expressed in a more lively and 
striking manner than it would be by the use of plain unadorned 
language. By means also of this psychological context we 
explain the connexion between parentheses and the discourse or 
passage in which they are inserted. 

And first, we shall say something of the imagery of the bible, 
which is properly discussed under the head of the psychological 
context, inasmuch as all imagery is founded, in some way, on 
the association of ideas. For instance, an author wishing to 
convey to the reader a very lively idea of the great qualities of 
his hero, is led, by means of the association of ideas, to think of 
some object or objects in which these qualities are very promi- 
nent ; and he then avails himself of such object or objects, in 
order to make, in a more forcible manner, the desired impression 
upon the mind of the reader. Thus, to illustrate the matter by 
a trite example. If an author wished to convey an exalted idea 
of the bravery or courage of Alexander the Great, he would be 
led to think of a lion, in which this quality is most prominent, 
and he would then avail himself of this image to attain his object. 
All imagery is resolved into something like this. In the expla- 
nation of these images of speech, three things are to be carefully 
attended to : first, the nature of the object or thing which is 
used as an image or representation ; as, in the example given, 
we ought to know the nature of the lion, as otherwise the 
author would fail to convey to us the idea which he intended ; 
secondly, we ought to know what it is, in the context, which 
the image is intended to illustrate — as in this example it is 
Alexander the Great to whom the image applies ; thirdly, we 
ought to know what is the idea, or what are the ideas, which 



204 



OF THE HEEMEXEUTTCAL CRITERIA 



the author would have us to consider as common to the image, 
and to that which the image illustrates. This is a most impor-. 
tant consideration ; for, since the image and that which it 
illustrates are not supposed to have all their properties like to 
each other, it is a matter of the greatest moment not to mis- 
take the points of agreement which the author would have us 
to attend to. 

The principal forms in which the imagery of the bible is 
presented to us are : the metaphor and the allegory, the simile 
and the parable, on each of which we shall offer a few obser- 
vations. 

And first, of the metaphor. The metaphor may be said to be 
a figure of speech by which a writer or speaker substitutes 
some image for the thought which that image is intended to 
illustrate. This substitution takes place on account of a tacit 
comparison which the mind makes between the image and the 
thought. So that the metaphor is nothing else than a virtual 
comparison between the image and the thought which is illustrated 
by the image. The metaphor is to be numbered among the most 
simple forms of scriptural imagery ; for, if the metaphorical 
description run into many words, it will be properly termed 
an allegory. As to the metaphors in the scripture, it must be 
first laid down as an unquestionable rule, that we are not to 
admit a metaphor in any passage unless where the nature of the 
imagery clearly points out the metaphor, or unless such a meta- 
phor be sanctioned by the well-known tropical usage of language 
among those for whom the scripture was written. Unless this 
rule were admitted, the interpretation of the scripture would 
become quite arbitrary. As to the mode of interpreting the 
metaphorical language of scripture, we must, in like manner, be 
guided either by the obvious tendency of the image which is 
employed, or by an acquaintance with the scriptural metaphori- 
cal usage of language. 

As I observed above, if the metaphorical description run into 
many words, it will be properly termed an allegory. The 
commencement of the fifth chapter of Isaias will furnish us with 
an example of the allegory : " My beloved had a vine- 

yard on a hill in a fruitful place. And he fenced it in, and 
picked the stones out of it, and planted it with the choicest 
vines, and built a tower in the midst thereof, and set. up a 
wine -press therein : and he looked that it should bring forth 
grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. And now, ye in- 
habitants of Jerusalem ! and ye men of Juda, judge between me 
and my vineyard. What is there that I ought to do more to 
my vineyard that I have not done to it ? Was it that I looked 



OF THE LITERAL SEXSE OE SCRIPTURE. 



205 



that it should bring forth grapes, and it hath brought forth 
wild grapes ? And now I will shew you what I will do to my 
vineyard. I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall 
be wasted : I will break down the wall thereof, and it shall be 
trodden down. And I will make it desolate ; it shall not be 
pruned, and it shall not be digged : but briers and thorns shall 
come up : and I will command the clouds to rain no rain upon 
it." — Isaias, v, 1-6. We perceive at once,, that the allegory 
is only a prolonged metaphor. We must observe here that an 
allegory occurring in scripture is not the same thing as that 
allegorical sense of scripture of which we spoke in a preceding 
part of this dissertation ; and which allegorical sense is one of 
the names given to that mystical or spiritual sense, which lies 
under the literal sense in several parts of the Old Testament. 
We must cautiously distinguish between the two things, because 
in one case, there is merely question of a figure of speech ; in 
the other case, there is question of the mystical sense of scripture. 

The simile is a figure of speech, by which two things are 
formally and expressly compared together, for the purpose of 
illustrating one of them. It differs from the metaphor in this 
particular, that the metaphor is an implicit and virtual compari- 
son between two things, whereas, in the simile, the comparison 
is express and formal. To illustrate this difference by an 
example — if one should say, of Alexander that he was a lion, 
that would be a metaphor ; but if he should say that he was like 
a lion, it would be a simile. In the simile, as is obvious, there 
is no word turned from its natural signification. Hence, the 
simile is not classed with those figures of speech which are called 
tropes. On the other hand, the metaphor belongs to the class 
of tropes ; because, in the metaphor, the word expressing the 
image is turned from its natural signification. Thus, in the 
example, Alexander ivas q lion, the word lion cannot be taken in 
its natural signification, as otherwise the sense would be, that 
Alexander was literally the beast called the lion. Hence, the 
word lion, as it stands in the metaphor, is turned from its 
natural meaning, and made to designate a brave and courageous 
person. There are other tropes besides the metaphor, viz., 
metonymy, synecdoche, irony, and altogether the figures of 
speech are very numerous ; but as it is not our object here 
to write a treatise on rhetoric, we must refer the reader to his 
elementary books for these, reminding him, at the same time, 
that a knowledge of them all will be most useful to him, as 
well for understanding the scripture, as for understanding our 
commentators, most of whom seldom fail to designate the figure 
of speech by its technical name. 



203 



OF THE HERMENEUTTCAL CRITERIA 



The only remaining form of the scriptural imagery on which 
we intend to speak, is the parable. The parable appears to bear 
the same relation to the simile, that the allegory bears to the 
metaphor ; and hence, in scripture, the parable is generally in- 
troduced by some such form as " the kingdom of heaven is like 
unto," &c. — from which it would appear, that the parable is but 
a prolonged simile. But, whatever may be thought of this re- 
lation of the parable to the simile, it is at least certain, that the 
nature of the scripture parables cannot be easily mistaken. The 
scripture parable is a continued and well-arranged narrative of 
some possible but fictitious event, applied to the illustration of 
some sacred truth. The custom of conveying instruction by 
means of parables is very ancient among the eastern nations. It 
has the advantage of fixing the attention of the hearer, whose 
curiosity is excited to penetrate into the meaning of the parable 
— and on account of the greater attention of the hearer as well 
as by reason of the more vivid impression made upon his mind 
by the imagery of the parable, the instruction thus conveyed is 
longer and better remembered by him. Instruction by means of 
the parable had also another advantage, referred to by our Re- 
deemer in the thirteenth chapter of St. Matthew's gospel ; this 
was, that it protected the sacred word from the disrespect with 
which the ill-disposed would have received it, had it been plainly 
announced. Such persons would not, on the other hand, listen 
to our Redeemer with that attention of mind required to penetrate 
into the meaning of the parable, and to derive from that mode 
of instruction all the advantage above mentioned ; and hence it 
is said of them in the gospel that they had ears and heard not. In 
the explanation of the scripture parables, two things principally 
must "be attended to — first, that in the parable often, persons are 
not compared with persons, nor the parts of the parable precisely 
with the parts of the thing signified ; but the whole parable is 
compaied with the whole thing which it illustrates. Thus, in the 
Gospel of St. Matthew, (xiii, 24,) in the parable which begins 
thus, " The kingdom of heaven is like to a man that sowed good 
seed," &c, were we to apply to each other those parts of the 
parable, and of the thing signified, which appear at first sight to 
be compared together, we should mistake the object and meaning 
of the parable : because, for instance, it is not precisely the 
sower, in this parable who is like to the kingdom of heaven ; he 
is rather, in reality, like to the king of heaven ; but the meaning 
of the parable is — that some such thing takes place in the king- 
dom of heaven, as would happen were a man to sow good seed 
in his land, and that afterwards an enemy would come and sow 
tares over the good seed, &c. The second thing to be attended 



OF THE LTTEEAL SENSE OE SCEIPTUEE. 207 

to in the interpretation of parables is, that in the parable all 
things are not to be applied to the thing signified ; for, some 
things are introduced merely for the purpose of rendering the 
narrative consistent throughout, and like to what might be sup- 
posed to happen in real life : such things are not, of course, in- 
tended for the illustration of the thing signified, but are mere 
ornaments of the narrative. In distinguishing those parts of the 
parable which are necessarily to be applied to the illustration of 
the thing signified by the parable, from those which are merely 
ornamental, we shall be guided by the scope and end of the 
parable. The scope and end of the parable will be learned from 
the context in which it is found, and sometimes there will be 
also certain historical helps available, for the purpose of learning 
the object of the speaker or writer in that place where the para- 
ble is introduced. 

Having said so much of the imagery of scripture, we may 
say a word or two on that other kind of psychological context 
which we have mentioned before, viz., the connexion of paren- 
theses with the passages in which they are introduced. It is 
well known, that the association of ideas in the mind of a writer 
will sometimes suggest observations which could not be regularly 
admitted into the discussion of the matter on hand ; and hence, 
if the writer wishes to record such observations, they must be 
inserted parenthetically. These parenthetical observations are 
frequently met with in the scripture, more particularly in the 
writings of St. Paul. Sometimes, their connexion with the con- 
text appears almost inexplicable. Yet, by diligently considering 
what may have been the association of ideas in the mind of the 
sacred writer, the connexion of the parenthesis with the context 
in which it is found will discover itself to us, if not with abso- 
lute certainty, at least with great probability. Take, for exam- 
ple, in the first Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, the twenty-third 
verse of the filth chapter, "Do not drink water, but use a 
little wine for thy stomach's sake, and thy frequent infirmities." 
It appears, at first sight, hard to perceive any reason why this 
observation should be inserted in an advice to Timothy regard- 
ing the manner in which lie should govern his clergy, and the 
caution with which he should admit persons to holy orders. But 
it would appear to me, that minute attention to the Apostle's 
words might warrant the following explanation of the connexion. 
The Apostle had told Timothy, in the twenty-second verse, not 
to impose hands upon any one without due caution ; as, by doing 
so, he would make himself a partaker in another man's sins. 
He tells Timothy, on the other hand, to keep himself pure ; and 
although he may have used this word pure with the intention 



208 



OF THE HERMEXEUTICAL CRITEEIA 



primarily, of warning Timothy against ordaining unfit persons ; 
and thus defiling himself by a partnership in other men's sins, 
yet, since this word pure also conveys the idea of chaste, St. Paul 
is reminded of the extraordinary mortifications practised by 
Timothy, for the greater security of his chastity — one of these 
was complete abstinence from wine, — and this practice (as it was 
not necessary for St. Timothy) St. Paul tells him to moderate, 
on account of the sickly state of his stomach, and his frequent 
infirmities. 

The historical, or chronological, context is found wherever 
there is a connected narrative of events, according to their chro- 
nological order. An acquaintance with sacred chronology, as 
also an acquaintance with the history of the Jews and Christians, 
down to the termination of the period embraced by the scripture 
records, and, moreover, an acquaintance with the history, down 
to the same time, of the unbelieving nations mentioned in the 
scripture, will throw much light upon this kind of context. As 
our limits will not permit us to dwell further upon the context, 
we now pass on to the other internal criterion of the sense — the 
parallelism. 

By parallelism we here understand the occurrence of the 
same sentiment, or the same word, in different places of the scrip- 
ture. The occurrence of the same word in different places is 
called verbal parallelism — the occurrence of the same sentiment 
is called real parallelism. T erbal parallelism is particularly to 
be attended to in the investigation of scriptural usage of language. 
However, since writers, in repeating the same sentiment, will 
commonly repeat some of the words, at least, in which they ex- 
pressed the sentiments before, hence we cannot here separate the 
verbal from the real parallelism. This parallelism is manifestly 
of great use in the interpretation of scripture : — First, If we per- 
ceive, by several indications in the context, that the same in- 
spired writer repeats the sentiment, or narrative, which he had 
previously expressed, or related ; then, whatever obscurity there 
was about the first expression of it is removed by this repetition, 
on the plain principle, that any writer (but particularly an in- 
spired writer) is the best interpreter of his own sentiments and 
language. Secondly, If the same thing is related, or expressed, 
by different inspired writers ; in this case also, the narrative, or 
statement, of one will serve for the explanation of the other ; the 
great reason of which is, the well-established truth of the inspi- 
ration of scripture, from which it follows, that all the scriptures 
proceed from one principal author — the Holy Ghost. 

The parallelism of the members of the same sentence, or of 
the members of the same proximate context, is also of great 



OF THE LITERAL SENSE OF SCRIPTURE. 



209 



use in the interpretation of scripture ; for, whether we speak 
of the case in which this parallelism is found to consist in the 
repetition of the same sentiment — or, whether we consider the 
case in which it lies in the juxta-position of opposite sentiments, 
it will in both cases, as is quite manifest, throw great light as 
well on the sentiments as on the language of the text. This 
kind of parallelism prevails throughout the poetical parts of the 
scripture, and is found to enter, more or less, into the composition 
of several other parts of it. 

Since, as has been already observed, parallel passages will be 
found to agree in many, at least, if not in all of the words ; hence, 
for discovering the parallel passages, concordances of the bible, as 
they are called, will be of great use. These are collections of 
the words of the scripture, written in alphabetical order together 
with an indication of the texts in which they are found. 
Cardinal Hugo a Sancta Caro, a Dominican, who made a con- 
cordance of the Latin Yulgate about the year 1262, is said to 
have been the first who conceived a work of this kind. 

Observe, that under this head of parallelism may be classed 
the quotation in the New Testament of texts from the Old. 
Sometimes these texts are quoted without adhering closely to 
the letter of the text as it occurs in the Old Testament ; and 
sometimes they are quoted merely according to the sense. In 
both these cases additional light will be thrown on the meaning 
of the passage as it lies in the Old Testament. Even when the 
text is quoted strictly according to the letter; still, the object 
to which it is applied in the New Testament will serve as a 
guide to its meaning in the Old. 

As we must be brief, we shall proceed to say a few words on 
the historical or external criteria of the sense. 

These may be reduced to four heads : — First, "Who is the 
person who speaks or writes ? Second, Who are the hearers, or 
the first readers of that which is spoken or written ? Third, 
What was the occasion of the discourse or writing, and in what 
circumstances was it spoken or written ? Fourth, What was 
the design or scope of the speaker or writer ? 

Very little requires to be said, in order to show the impor- 
tance, to the interpreter of scripture, of attending particularly to 
all these questions. And first, as to the person who speaks or 
writes; without attention to this point, we might sometimes 
place on a level with the rest of scripture the words of some 
uninspired person, who is introduced as speaking in the sacred 
volume. For example, a great deal of the book of Job is taken 

inspired to speak us they did, although the writer of that book 



210 



OP THE HERMENETJTICAL CRITERIA 



was inspired to commit to writing, without intending to approve 
of, what they said. Even in the case of inspired speakers or 
writers, it will be of great utility to know their history ; as 
by means of this knowledge we shall understand many allu- 
sions, the force of which would otherwise escape our notice. 
Moreover, this acquaintance with the history of the various 
characters introduced in the bible, and with the history of the 
writers of the bible, will enable us to account satisfactorily for 
the variety of style and manner of expression, so apparent in 
the sacred volume. For, as it is commonly admitted, the Holy 
Ghost, although He inspired all the writers of the scripture, 
yet, ordinarily, He did not elevate their style to a higher degree 
of excellence than might be expected from their education and 
opportunities of learning ; but He merely suggested to them 
the sentiments which they committed to writing, guarding them 
at the same time from any error in the manner of expressing 
them. 

Secondly, The interpreter must also endeavour to ascertain 
to what class of hearers the discourses contained in the scrip- 
ture were addressed, and who the persons were for whose 
immediate benefit the epistles, and the other parts of the bible, 
were composed. The importance of attending to this point is 
obvious. Every prudent speaker will be influenced in the 
manner of his address by the nature of his audience. Hence, 
we see what a difference there is between the discourse 
delivered by St. Paul in the synagogue of the Jews, at Antioch 
in Pisidia, (Acts, xiii,) and that which he addressed to the 
Athenians in the Areopagus (Acts, xvii.) We see also, how full 
and explicit our Eecleemer is when addressing His disciples, as 
compared with His manner when replying to those who pro- 
posed questions for the purpose of tempting Him, and entrapping 
Him in His words. We say, moreover, that it behoves the 
interpreter to know who the first readers were for whom the 
epistles and other parts of the scripture were composed : tor, 
seeing that these writings were composed to meet some urgent 
necessity of the faithful, without which they would not have 
existed, (for example, if all the Galatians had persevered 
steadily in the faith which they had received, the epistle to 
the Galatians would never have been written :) from this it 
follows that those writings must have been accommodated to the 
special wants and requirements of those to whom they were 
first addressed. Hence, the more we know of the state and 
circumstances of the persons to whom they were addressed, the 
more perfectly shall we acquire the knowledge of the sense of 
these writings. Again, we shall find that these writings con- 



OF THE LITERAL SENSE OP SCRIPTURE. 



211 



tain certain brief forms of expression, and certain allusions, at 
first sight very obscure. The reason of this is, that these writ- 
ings having been specially intended for those to whom they were 
first addressed, the writer knew that for them these brief forms 
of expression, and these allusions, had no obscurity. Hence, 
it follows that the better acquainted we shall become with the 
history and circumstances of those first readers, the more com- 
pletely shall this obscurity be removed for us from these writings. 
We shall learn the history of these first hearers of the scriptural 
discourses, and first readers of scriptural writings, partly from 
the scripture itself, and partly from other historical sources. In 
the same way shall we learn the history of those who are intro- 
duced as speaking in the scripture ; and the history of the inspired 
writers. 

We come now to the third external criterion of the sense, 
viz : what was the occasion of the discourse or writing, and in what 
circumstances ivas it spoken or written ? To know that which 
gave occasion to any discourse, or written document, is evidently 
of vast importance towards the right understanding of what is 
said or written. Take, for example, the epistle of St. Paul to 
the Eomans — at first sight it might seem that the apostle there 
asserts that a man cannot merit in any sense, by his works, 
either first or second justification. But, if we attend to that 
which gave occasion to this epistle, the difficulty will be re- 
moved. St. Paul was moved to write the epistle in consequence 
of learning that disputes had arisen between the Jewish and 
Gentile converts at Koine, regarding their respective claims to 
the gospel benefits. The Jews urging their observance of the 
written law, as having entitled them to these benefits ; whilst 
they contended that the Gentiles obtained these benefits as a 
pure mercy from God, seeing the state of iniquity in which they 
had previously lived. The Gentiles, on the other hand, boasted 
of their observance of the natural law, as giving them a claim 
to these blessings of the gospel, whilst they upbraided the Jews 
with having, by their gross violation of the written law, disen- 
titled themselves to the benefits in question ; consequently they 
inferred that for the possession of these benefits, the Jews stood 
indebted to the pure bounty of God. Such being the nature of 
the controversy which gave occasion to St. Paul's letter, we 
see at once how he is to be understood, when he declares equiva- 
lently, that a man's works in no sense merit, either first or 
second justification. He must be understood to speak of works 
done by a man's own strength — not of works done under the 
influence of the grace of Christ : because, the question between 
the two parties at Kome did not turn upon the co-operation of 



212 



OP THE HEEEXEXETJTICAL CRITERIA 



either party with the grace of Christ ; but upon the claims 
which each party contended that it had to this grace of Christ ; 
of course, on account of works done previously to the grace, and 
consequently not done under its influence.* 

That which gave occasion to the writing of any book, or 
portion of scripture, will be learned sometimes sufficiently from 
the scripture itself. Thus, it is abundantly manifest from the 
first epistle of St, Paul to the Corinthians, that what gave oc- 
casion to the writing of that epistle was, first, a report made to 
St. Paul of the existence of certain abuses in the Church at 
Corinth, and secondly, an application by letter, made to the 
apostle for the solution of certain difficulties by which the faith- 
ful at Corinth were then perplexed. Sometimes, the occasion 
which called forth the inspired writer may be learned partly 
from the scripture, and partly from other sources. 

The knowledge, moreover, of the circumstances of time, 
place, &c, in which any book or portion of scripture was written, 
will contribute wonderfully to clear up several allusions and 
references, which, without a knowledge of these circumstances, 
would be but imperfectly understood. This point is too clear to 
require any illustration. Hence, introductions to the particular 
books of scripture never fail to determine these circumstances of 
the time and place of writing, &c, as far as the contents of the 
book and other historical sources enable one to determine them. 
Of course, the more perfectly the interpreter makes himself ac- 
quainted with such circumstances the better will he perform his 
task ; but we would not be understood as saying, that for a right 
understanding of any book of scripture, a minute and accurate 
knowledge of all such circumstances is essential. 

Finally, the design or scope of the speaker or writer is a cri- 
terion of the sense which claims the particular attention of the 
interpreter. In fact, we may say, that the great key to the in- 
terpretation of any speaker or writer is to know what his aim is 
in his discourse or composition. By the help of the knowledge 
of this aim or scope, the meaning of words which admit of a 
variety of senses will be determined, viz., to that sense which 
agrees with the scope of the author : the omission of certain 
particulars in a narrative will be accounted for, viz., by the 
reason that the mention of these particulars would conduce 
nothing to the end which the narrator had in view. In a word, 

* Whatever salutary works were performed by Jew or Gentile before 
the promulgation of the gospel, were performed, no doubt, through the 
grace oi Christ — but. from the nature of the controversy between the 
Jewish and Gentile converts at Koine, it is manifest that both parties 
overlooked this consideration. 



OF THE LITERAL SENSE OF SCEIPTUEE. 



213 



the whole meaning of a discourse or composition is affected by 
the end or aim which the speaker or writer proposed to him- 
self, insomuch that the same words, or even the same sentences, 
will put on different meanings, according as the discourses or 
compositions in which they are found have different ends in view. 
As a knowledge of the scope is of such importance, it is, conse- 
quently, a matter of the greatest moment for the interpreter 
of scripture that he should not mistake this scope. In the 
scripture, sometimes the inspired writer himself informs us what 
the end is which he proposes to himself. Thus St. John marks 
the end which he had in view in writing his gospel, in these 

words, (xx, 31,) " These things are written that you may 

believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God : and that be- 
lieving, you may have life in his name." Sometimes, the 
frequent references to a particular point will enable us to dis- 
cover the scope of the writer. Thus, in the epistle of St. Paul 
to the Hebrews, we know that the scope of the apostle is to 
induce the Hebrews to persevere in the Christian faith, notwith- 
standing the persecutions and trials to which they were then 
subjected on account of the profession of it. We collect this 
scope of St. Paul in this epistle from several things in the epistle 
itself, which combine to point it out. First, from what he says 
of the value of the Christian faith ; then, from what he says of 
the necessity of persevering in the profession of this faith, under 
all the sufferings which the enemies of it may inflict ; again, 
from his pointing to several examples of patience under such 
persecutions, &c. Sometimes, the occasion being known, which 
called forth any particular epistle or book that will suffice to 
make us acquainted with the scope which the writer had in view 
in such epistle or book. Thus, what gave occasion to the Epistle 
to the Galatians was the fact, that certain Judaizing teachers 
had come amongst them, and had even succeeded so far as to with- 
draw some of them from the faith. Such having been the oc- 
casion which called forth this epistle, we should naturally expect 
that its scope would be to point out the intrinsic infirmity of 
the Jewish ceremonies, their abrogation, and the impossibility 
of uniting a sound Christian faith with the belief that these 
ceremonies continue obligatory : and such is really the scope of 
that epistle. In fine, sometimes, ecclesiastical history will help 
us towards the knowledge of the scope of a book or portion of 
scripture ; inasmuch as the sacred writer, although he did not 
mark down in his book the end which he had in view in writing 
it, yet may have have orally communicated this end to others, 
who transmitted the knowledge of it to those who came after 
them. 



214 



OF THE DOGMATICAL 



CHAPTEK IY. 

OF THE DOG-XATICAL LAWS OF EPTTEEPEETATI02T. 

Ve must refer now, for the present briefly, to the dogmatical 
laws of interpretation. These laws are deduced from two dogmas 
of the Christian religion. The first of which dogmas is, The 
scripture is divinely inspired. The second is, It belongs to the 
Church to judge of the true sense and interpretation of scripture. 

The truth of these two propositions is abundantly established 
in treatises on dogmatical theology ; and on the first of them we 
have ourselves enlarged somewhat, in a previous part of this 
work. "We shall here content ourselves with pointing out some 
consequences which are deducible from them, and which bear 
on the matter in hand. And first, as to the inspiration of scrip- 
ture, of the nature and extent of which we have treated in a 
former chapter, from this dogma we deduce, as an obvious con- 
sequence, that no inspired writer can contradict himself or any 
other inspired writer ; and again, that there is nothing contained 
in scripture at variance with any truth, either historical or 
philosophical ; in other words, that the scripture cannot contra- 
dict itself, nor, in fine, contradict any truth, in whatever depart- 
ment of knowledge that truth exists. The reason of all this 
simply is, that truth can never be at variance with itself : now, 
according to the dogma of the inspiration of scripture, the entire 
sacred volume proceeds from one principal author — the Spirit of 
Truth, who is truth itself. When, therefore, it is alleged, that 
there is a contradiction between any two texts of scripture, we 
ought first to examine whether both apparently contradictory 
assertions proceed from inspired authors : for, since in the bible 
several persons are introduced as speaking who were not inspired, 
such as the friends of Job, and the scribes and pharisees in the 
Gospel ; and since the scripture does not guarantee the veracity 
of these, it follows, that such persons may contradict themselves 
or each other, or, in fine, may contradict some inspired writer ; 
and yet, nothing will result from this injurious to the doctrine 
of the inspiration of .scripture. If the two apparently contra- 
dictory assertions or statements proceed from inspired writers, 
then, if we consider attentively the different circumstances in 
which each statement was made — if we weigh well the sense, 
which the context and other hermeneutical considerations require 
to have affixed to each passage, we shall discover that the con- 



LAWS OF INTERPRETATION. 



215 



tradiction is only apparent, not real. In fine, if, in the case of 
two statements proceeding from inspired authors, a real 
contradiction should manifest itself in the sacred volume 
as it is found at present, then we must conclude that 
the reading of at least one of the passages is erroneous ; and, 
(if a case of the kind really exists,) "biblical criticism will enable 
us to discover the error. If, however, biblical criticism would 
not, in some case, enable us to discover the error in the reading, 
we should be equally certain, from arguments a priori, of the 
existence of that error ; seeing the solid grounds upon which the 
doctrine of the inspiration of scripture rests. 

In like manner, if any statement of scripture appears to be 
in contradiction with any truth, historical, philosophical, or from 
whatever source derived, our first business is to examine if this 
truth, which is alleged as in opposition to the scripture, be really 
well founded, so as to deserve the appellation of a truth ; for, we 
know that many philosophical doctrines have, from time to 
time, passed current among superficial enquirers, which have 
since been rejected as baseless and untenable ; and other philoso- 
phical doctrines may hereafter experience a similar fate. If, 
however, that which is brought forward as apparently in contra- 
diction with scripture should be really a truth, then we shall 
proceed to examine whether the particular statement contained 
in scripture is there attributed to an inspired writer or speaker, 
or whether it be not the statement or assertion of some unin- 
spired person, whose words are recorded in the scripture, whilst 
his veracity is not guaranteed by it. If the passage in question 
should be ascribed to the writer of the scripture, or to some 
speaker whose veracity the scripture guarantees, then we must 
examine if we have really caught the meaning of the scripture 
in this place, and if the meaning should be clear, we must lastly 
proceed to discover the error of reading, being certain a priori, 
as I have observed before, that no passage of scripture, according 
to its correct reading, can be at variance with any truth, in 
whatever department of knowledge that truth lies, always except- 
ing those discourses and statements of uninspired and fallible 
persons which the scripture records. 

We shall now say a few words of the influence on the 
Catholic interpreter of the other dogmatical law of interpreta- 
tion. This law is — that it belongs to the Church to judge of the 
true sense and interpretation of scripture. Dogmatical theology 
abundantly proves, that Christ has established in His church a 
pastoral authority — an infallible teacher and guardian of that 
faith delivered by Him and His apostles. This same pastoral 
authority has been, also, constituted the guardian and interpre- 



216 OF THE DOGMATICAL 

ter of the written word. The proof of these positions is so easily 
to be met with in any course of Catholic dogmatic theology, and 
is so familiar to Catholic readers, that we omit it here. In con- 
formity with this arrangement of the Divine Head of the Chris- 
tian Church, the Council of Trent decrees— we subjoin the words 
of the council— in the fourth session : — " Adcoercenda petulantia 
ingenia decernit (S. Synodus) ut nemo suaa prudentias innixus, 
in rebus fidei, et morum, ad gedificationem doctrinse Christianas 
pertinentium, sacram scrip turam ad suos sensus contorquens, 
contra eum sensum quern tenuit et tenet sancta mater ecclesia 
cujus est judicare de vero sensu et interpretatione scrip turarum 
sacrarum, aut etiam contra unanimem consensum Patrum, ipsam 
scripturam sanctam interpretari audeat." The sum of this decree 
is, that no one is to presume to interpret the scripture against 
that sense which the church has held and holds, nor against the 
unanimous consent of the Fathers. Seeing, then, that the inter- 
preter of scripture is not at liberty to go against that sense of 
scripture which the church holds, it is important for him to 
know what this sense is : now, this he will discover in the same 
way as that by which he learns the rest of the Christian faith ; 
for, this sense of scripture, being handed down by tradition, be- 
longs to the deposit of faith. There are two modes, then, by 
which the church may manifest her interpretation of scripture — 
the first of these modes is direct, the other indirect. The direct 
mode is used when the church explicitly declares that she 
attaches a certain sense to a particular passage or text of scrip- 
ture. The church uses the indirect mode of manifesting her in- 
terpretation of scripture by declaring to us that we must always 
interpret the scripture in a manner conformable to the analogy 
of faith. 

As to the direct mode — the church may declare in two ways 
her interpretation of a passage of scripture — first, by a solemn 
definition ; secondly, by the universal assent of the dispersed 
church, continued down from the earliest times. We must 
observe, however, that the obligation imposed by the law of 
Trent, of adhering to the interpretation of the church, only holds 
in rebus fidei, et morum, ad cedificationem doctrines Christians perti- 
nentium — that is, " in matters of faith and of morals, appertain- 
ing to the edification of Christian doctrine." Hence, the law 
regards not, for example, matters appertaining to geography, 
computation of time, and such like. Indeed, with regard to all 
such things, it is not the custom of the church to decide upon 
the meaning of scripture ; unless in some instances, where the 
matter will be bound up, under some respect, with the " matters 
of faith and of morals belonging to the edification of Christian 



LAWS OF LSTEEPEETATION. 



217 



doctrine," and in such cases, of course, this law of Trent will be 
obligatory upon us. 

There are but few texts of scripture of which the meaning 
has been decided by a solemn definition of the church. "We must 
observe, however, with Professor Patrizi (Hermeneuti, vol. i, p. 
62), that the church sometimes, in a solemn definition of a point 
of doctrine, so uses some text of scripture as a proof of the doc- 
trine defined, that it is not allowable for us to depart from the 
meaning there assigned to the text, although the direct object of 
the church's definition in the circumstances is not the interpre- 
tation of the text. 

The universal assent of the dispersed church, continued down 
from the earliest times, is quite sufficient to manifest the church's 
authoritative interpretation of any text or passage of scripture, 
according to the well-known words of Lerins, (Commonit., c. 3,) 
that that is to be held ' ' quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab om- 
nibus creditum est:" " which has been believed everywhere, 
which has been believed alvrays, wbich has been believed by all." 
But what sufficient means have we of learning this assent of 
which we speak on the part of the dispersed church ? An abun- 
dantly sufficient — as well as the principal means — of learning 
this assent of the dispersed church is had in the writings of the 
holy Fathers — those famous witnesses of the tradition of the 
church. IS or will it be objected against their authority 
that they lived at a remote period from us; for, the deposit 
of faith is ever the same, and whensoever the church de- 
cides upon the meaning of any passage of scripture, she only 
proclaims the tradition that has come down from the apostolic 
times regarding that passage of scripture : and it is in order that 
she may proclaim this tradition accurately, that she is assisted 
by the Holy Ghost in her decision. The Council of Trent, then, 
has well laid it down, in the law already cited, that we must 
not interpret the scripture against the unanimous consent of the 
Fathers. And such weight is attached to their unanimous con- 
sent, not precisely on account of their personal authority, whe- 
ther we view them individually or collectively, but because they 
are most faithworthy witnesses of the belief of the church in 
their own time. Here we must observe, first, that in order to 
be bound by the interpretation of the Fathers, they must have 
all, morally speaking, agreed in that interpretation ; for the coun- 
cil speaks of the unanimous consent of the Fathers. In a word, 
the agreement of these ancient witnesses, and the manner in 
which they treat the scriptural text or passage, must be such as 
to show that the interpretation was, in their time, universal in 
the church. Hence, for example, if the Fathers allegorize, or 



218 



OE THE DOGMATICAL 



speak doubtingly in their interpretation, there is no bar to our 
striking out a different course for ourselves in the explanation 
of the passage. Secondly, we must again consider here, whether 
the things, in the interpretation of which the Fathers agree re- 
gard the matters of faith and morals belonging to the edification of 
Christian doctrine* or not. If they do not, we are not forbidden 
to depart from their interpretation ; yet we ought not, without 
the strongest reasons, to desert any interpretation of scripture 
which has in its favour the unanimous consent of the Fathers, 
such authority being always entitled to the highest respect. 

Having said so much of the direct mode by which the church 
manifests to us her interpretation of scripture, we come now to 
say a word or two of that indirect mode by which the church 
points out the meaning of the sacred volume, and by which she 
controls us in the interpretation of the entire scripture. The 
church, as was said before, uses this indirect mode in declaring 
to us that we must always interpret the scripture in a manner 
conformable to the analogy of faith. By analogy, in general, is 
meant, a certain likeness and agreement. By the analogy of 
faith is meant, the agreement which subsists between all the 
parts of the Christian doctrine ; in other words, between all the 
parts of the deposit of faith. This agreement necessarily subsists, 
seeing that all the parts of that deposit of faith proceed from the 
same Spirit of truth, who cannot be at variance with Himself. 
Hence we must not, by any means, attach to any text of scrip- 
ture such a sense as would be irreconcilable with any portion of 
the doctrine which the church teaches. We must, therefore, 
when engaged in the interpretation of scripture, always remem- 
ber that there is a body of doctrine taught by the church, part 
of which she derives from the written, and part from the unwrit- 
ten word ; and that we must take care that with this body of 
doctrine no interpretation given by us to scripture shall ever be 
found to clash. This wholesome restraint upon the liberty of 
the Catholic interpreter is a manifest consequence of his belief 
in the power which Christ gave to the pastors of His church to 
to teach all nations, as well as of his belief in the security against 
error which Christ promised to the pastors of His church, in the 
exercise of that power, to the end of time. And in reality, from 
the earliest days of the Christian church the liberty of the inter- 
preter of scripture was restricted in the same way. For no part 

* As the English word edification is taken here in rather a quaint and 
unusual sense, we may explain these words of the Council of Trent by 
saying, that the council refers to all matters of faith and of morals, or 
such general discipline as is bound up with the integrity of the Christian 
doctrine. 



LAWS OF LNTERPKETATIOX. 



219 



of the New Testament (and this can be easily shown in the in- 
troduction to each of the books of it,) was written with the view 
that infidels should learn the Christian faith by reading it ; but 
all the parts or books of it were written in order that those who 
had already received the faith might be more fully instructed 
and confirmed in the faith, and induced to regulate their lives in 
accordance with their faith. Such being the case, the faithful, 
to whom these writings were first committed, must have been 
careful not to take any meaning from them which would be at 
variance with the doctrine that they had been taught already. 
For example, if St. Peter or St. James, or any other apostle, had 
addressed an epistle to the Christians of Galatia, these would 
have been bound not to affix to any part of that epistle such a 
sense as would bring it into opposition with the doctrine preached 
by St. Paul when he founded the churches of Galatia. So true 
is this, that St. Paul, writing to these Galatians, pronounces 
anathema against any one, should it be even himself or an angel 
from heaven, who would preach (and we may safely add or -write) 
to them what would be at variance with the gospel which he 
had already preached to them ; (see the first chapter of his epistle 
to the Galatians). There are some of those who complain of this 
restriction of the liberty of the interpreter in the Catholic Church, 
who yet say, that if Catholics had the same security against 
error in following the teaching of their church as the Galatians 
had in following the preaching of St. Paul, there would be 
nothing to complain of in this restraint upon the interpreter. 
Our answer is, that according to our belief — and that this belief 
rests upon the firmest foundation our theologians abundantly 
prove — the same spirit of truth that inspired St. Paul, and pre- 
served him from error in his preaching, assists the pastors of the 
church, preserving them from error in their teaching. Of 
course, we here speak of that kind of teaching on the part of the 
pastors of the church, to which, according to the well-known 
Catholic doctrine, the prerogative of infallibility attaches. We 
have said enough on this point. We may, however, in conclu- 
sion observe, that it was only when heresy had taught presump- 
tuous men to emancipate themselves from this necessary restraint 
of which we speak, that those perversions of scripture first began 
to make their appearance, which have gone on advancing in im- 
piety and folly until at length, in the commentaries of the 
Rationalists, they have divested the scripture of everything 
supernatural and sacred. The Socinians thought that they had 
as good a right to get rid of all mysteries in their interpretation 
of scripture, as the heresiarchs who went before them had to 
discard some mysteries from the sacred volume which were as 

/ 



220 



CRITERIA OE THE MYSTICAL SENSE. 



clearly expressed there as any others ; and the Eationalist com- 
mentators thought that they were as well entitled to remove 
everything supernatural as the Socinians were to remove every- 
thing mysterious from the bible. We see, then, how necessary 
for the interpreter of scripture is this submission to the church's 
teaching. It is only in the Catholic Church that this salutary 
restraint exists, and hence we are fully justified in saying, that 
it is only Catholic hermeneutics that is entitled to be called the 
science of the interpretation of scripture. 



CHAPTER V. 

CRITERIA OP THE MYSTICAL SENSE — ON EACTS OR ACTIONS OE A SYM- 
BOLICAL CHARACTER THAT ARE RELATED IN SCRIPTURE. 

This appears to be a convenient place for saying a few words 
of the criteria by which we may arrive at the mystical meaning 
of the scripture ; and also of the hermeneutical helps to the 
understanding of those parts of scripture in which the facts re- 
lated are merely symbolical. 

As has been explained before — wherever that which is related 
in scripture as having been said or done, is typical of something 
in the Eedeemer or His church, there the scripture has two 
senses — the literal, which we discover by the foregoing rules — 
and the mystical or typical, which is based upon the literal sense, 
and has its fulfilment in Christ and His church. The first source 
whence we are to draw the knowledge of this mystical sense is 
the scripture itself ; for we find that the inspired writers of the 
New Testament often refer to the mystical meaning of the Old : 
thus, the precept given regarding the paschal lamb, " 5Tou shall 
not break a bone of it," (^Exod. xii, 46,) is declared by St. John 
in his gospel to have been typical of Christ, (xix, 33, 36.) In 
like manner, St. Paul, in the epistle to the Hebrews, throughout 
the ninth chapter, affirms that the Mosaic rite of purifying what 
was legally unclean by blood, had reference to the death of 
Christ — " It is necessary that the types of the heavenly things 
be cleansed by these ; but the heavenly thing3 themselves by 
better victims than these." (ix, 23.) Sometimes, although the 
inspired writer does not adduce formally the mystical sense of 
the Old Testament, yet he makes such allusion to it as leaves no 
doubt of its being referred to. Take for example the first Epistle 
to the Corinthians, v, 7, where St. Paul says, " Purge out the 
old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. 
For Christ our paseh is sacrificed." Here the apostle sufficiently 



OK SY1IBOLICAL ACTIONS. 



221 



intimates that the law, prohibiting the use of unleavened bread 
during the paschal solemnity, mystically inculcated that purity 
and holiness in which Christians ought to live. Finally, we 
may discover (of course with more or less of certainty) the typica 
meaning of several parts of the Old Testament that are not ex- 
plained in the New. For — remembering the general typical 
character of the Old Testament — if we find anything appertain- 
ing to that portion of scripture which bears a striking similarity 
to something in the New Testament, we need have but little 
hesitation in looking on the two things as type and antitype. 
Thus, from the great similarity between the two events, we 
might infer that the history about Abraham going to immolate 
his son, was typical of the death of Christ upon the Cross ; even 
if this had not been pointed out in the scripture. — See Epistle 
to Hebrews, xi, 19. 

As to the parts of the scripture in which symbolical actions 
are related, these are to be found both in the Old and the New Tes- 
tament. For, the symbolical sense, unlike the typical, has not 
necessarily its fulfilment in Christ and His church ; but the sym- 
bolical sense is simply that sense to which some action points, 
inasmuch as that action is viewed in the light of a symbol. In 
order to understand the symbolical actions of scripture, observe, 
first, that often the sacred writer himself marks down the 
sense which such an action is intended to convey. Thus, in 
Jeremias (twenty-seventh chapter, second verse and following,) 
we read, " Thus saith the Lord to me, make thee bands and 
chains, and thou shalt put them on thy neck, and thou shalt 
send them to the king of Edom and the king of Moab ; " (and 
the prophet subjoins the meaning of this symbolical action,) .... 
" And now I have given all these lands into the hands of Nabu- 
chodonosor, king of Babylon, .... and ail nations shall serve 
him." Secondly, as it has been customary with every nation to 
use certain actions as signs of honour, contempt, &c. ; therefore, 
in order to arrive at the symbolical sense of scripture we ought 
to keep in view what these actions were to which the Jewish 
nation attached these several meanings. Thirdly, if an action 
is related as having been performed by a prudent man, or com- 
manded by God, which would be manifestly an unmeaning or 
useless action unless it were viewed as symbolical ; then, what- 
ever may be the particular sense which it is intended to convey, 
we must look upon the action itself as merely symbolical. 



222 



OF THE RATIONALISTIC 



CHAPTER VI. 

ON THE NEW EXEG-ESIS, OR THE RATIONALISTIC SYSTEMS OF 
HERjIENETJTICS. 

"We have already, more than once, in the course of this dis- 
sertation, glanced at the mode in which the Rationalists dis- 
pose of the sense of scripture. We think it advisable, however, 
for more reasons than one, to devote a short chapter to a regular 
statement of their views on this matter. First, Because the 
Rationalists do not agree precisely in any one system of herme- 
neutics. Secondly, and this is the principal reason — Because 
the glaring aberrations of these men furnish an additional justifi- 
cation of the wise conduct of the Catholic church, in insisting 
that the interpreter of scripture shall, in all things, submit 
himself to her authoritative teaching. Nothing is more usual 
than to find Protestant writers descanting upon the slavish sub- 
mission, as they term it, to His church, in which the Catholic 
interpreter is forced to execute his task, when he undertakes to 
explain any part of the sacred volume. This restraint, they say, 
altogether cramps his energies, and unduly limits the field of 
his enquiries. Now, enough has been said already to show 
that the Catholic church acts most reasonably in this particular. 
Whilst she exercises the authority with which Christ has in- 
vested her, and which is necessary for the preservation of unity 
in faith, she does not shut out the interpreter of the scripture 
from any truly rational use of those ordinary means by which 
the sense of a writing or discourse is penetrated. But here we 
turn to those Protestants, for of such we speak, who, in common 
with us, bewail the licentiousness with which many on the 
continent, and particularly in Germany, calling themselves theo- 
logians, have approached the interpretation of scripture, and we 
ask, what has led to this licentiousness ? Simply, the removal 
of the Catholic principle of authority, and the substitution of 
the principle of private judgment in its stead — and those who 
have set up this principle of private judgment as the guide in 
interpreting scripture, have no right to control others in its 
exercise. Let us now behold some of the fruits of this principle 
in those systems of biblical interpretation which the German 
Rationalists have propounded, and which they have dignified 
with the name the New Exegesis. 

All the Rationalists agree in this, that they approach the 
interpretation of scripture with a preconceived system of philo- 



SYSTEMS OP HEEMENETJTICS. 



223 



sophy, which they call the teaching of reason ; and everything 
in the scripture which does not square with this, is either 
explained away by some means or other, no matter how far- 
fetched or absurd, or it is at once pronounced erroneous. 
Agreeing in this point, they still follow different methods, in 
order to set aside the obvious sense of scripture, wherever it is 
opposed to their views. 

First — There is the system of rfloral interpretation, very 
different from the moral or tropological sense of scripture as 
understood in Catholic schools, and which has been already ex- 
plained. The system of moral interpretation owes its origin to 
Kant, formerly professor of logic and metaphysics in the 
university of Konigsberg. The great end which Kant proposed 
to himself in his moral philosophy was, the inculcation of what 
he terms the pure religion of reason. JNow, it appears manifest 
from the teaching of this philosopher, that this was but another 
name for Deism — and that the establishment of this pure religion 
of reason would involve the total subversion of Christianity. 
With these preconceived notions, Kant proceeds to the interpre- 
tation of scripture. He admits that the bible proceeds from God. 
From this he infers that none but the most perfect notions 
should be conveyed by it. The literal sense, he contends, must 
be overlooked as not conveying these perfect notions : and as, 
according to him, the moral amendment of mankind is the proper 
object of the entire religion of reason, hence the only sense 
which is to be taken from the scripture is one which tends to 
the moral amendment of man, in conformity with the religion 
of reason. Kant teaches that the historical part of the scriptures 
contributes nothing to make men better, and is, therefore, 
purely indifferent, and may be disposed of as we please. In 
the other parts of scripture, Kant's system permits the most 
fanciful constructions to be put upon the text, provided that 
by this means a sense could be educed, which would contribute 
to what he considered the moral amendment of mankind. Of 
course, this system of Kant's, like the other nationalistic 
systems of interpretation, only requires to be known in order 
to be reprobated; nor is it necessary to adduce examples of 
interpretation in conformity with such systems, which are not 
more impious than they are absurd. The object of such systems 
is not really to discover the sense of scripture, but to invent a 
sense foreign to it, which they may impose upon it. What 
"Wegscheider says of Kant will hold true for all these systems, 
" Sensum inferens non efferens." (Institutiones, s. 24, p. 91.) 
And we may observe that the book of Wegscheider's, here 



224 



OF THE RATIONALISTIC 



quoted, is reputed the text-book of Eationalism ; so that the 
author describes himself here as well as Kant. 

Second — Another such system of interpretation is what is 
called the Psychologico-historical. It has been chiefly set forth 
and evolved by Paulus and Eichorn. According to it, one must, 
in order to find the sense of scripture, not only attend to what 
is recorded in the scripture, but he must, moreover, form to him- 
self a proper notion of the state of mind of the narrator at the 
time of giving the narrative contained in the text. They say, 
that by this means one will be enabled to divest the narrative 
of several circumstances, having no foundation in fact, but alto- 
gether ascribable to the over- credulous simplicity of the narrators. 
They do not attack the honesty of the sacred writers, but view 
them in the light of simpletons, who exalted into supernatural 
events what more enlightened men would have explained in a 
natural way. Thus, these interpreters get rid of the miraculous 
in the scripture ; in a word, of everything which would suppose 
the direct interference of the Deity, or would, in any way, clash 
with what they consider contrary to reason. It is unnecessary 
to say that such a system of interpretation as this is incompatible, 
not only with the inspiration, but even with the veracity of the 
scripture records. It is, therefore, to be rejected with abhorrence. 

Third — A system of more straightforward impiety than the 
preceding is what is called the accommodation system; according to 
which our Redeemer and his apostles are blasphemously said 
to have accommodated themselves to the ignorance and prejudices 
of the Jews. This had been for a long time a favourite system 
with the Rationalists of Germany, before the writings of SSniler 
gave it a new impulse, and rendered it still more popular among 
the miscalled theologians of that country, by some of whom it 
has been even more fully developed than by Sender himself. 
In conformity with this mode of interpretation, the notions of 
the Jews respecting demons, and angels, the Holy Spirit, recon- 
ciliation to God by sacrifice, the person and kingdom of the 
Messias, the resurrection, and the judgment, are supposed to have 
oeen retained by our Redeemer, and His apostles, in condescension 
to the current belief; their own teaching being adapted to, and 
engrafted upon these notions ! ! ! 

Fourth — Among these systems, the mythic interpretation holds 
a prominent place. The my thus is a certain fanciful dress, in 
which a writer or speaker, for some reason, envelopes the idea 
or truth which he wishes to communicate. According to this 
system, the historical facts of the Old and New Testaments were 
not actual occurrences, but myths. The mythological school 



SYSTEMS OF HERMENEUTICS. 



225 



distinguish several kinds of mythi, viz,, the historical, philo- 
sophical, etymological, and poetical. They say that all these 
can be discovered in the scripture. The purely historical mythus, 
say they, relates an occurrence, not as it actually took place, hut 
only in such a manner as it must have appeared to a rude age. 
The philosophical mythus they define to be, either a pure fiction, 
framed for the purpose of conveying some philosophical idea or 
truth ; or, at least, a fiction to this extent, that the historical 
truth upon which it is based is enlarged and dressed out by the 
philosopher, in a manner agreeable to his own views and purpose. 
Etymological mythi, according to these doctors, are compounded 
of the historical and philosophical, and belong to such as are 
called mixed. They contain some historical truth, with a measure 
of philosophical speculation. When this was founded on the 
etymological signification of a word, it was denominated an ety- 
mological mythus. Finally, the poetic mytki they describe to be 
fictions, framed by the Hebrew poets to amplify and adorn their 
writings. Ey means of their system the mythological school 
have thrust aside every event recorded in the Old Testament 
which is removed from the sphere of daily experience, and, in 
place of such, they have substituted certain refined ideas dic- 
tated by philosophical systems. Nor has the mythus been applied 
to the Old Testament alone as a key to its interpretation. The 
awful impiety of the " Lives of Christ," from the pens of Strauss 
and Weisse, show how this school has attempted to destroy the 
sacred character and veracity of the New Testament. But we 
have said enough of this class of profaners of the scripture. It 
is quite manifest that their system was framed for the express 
purpose of setting aside the historical veracity of the sacred 
volume, and substituting in its place a series of learned fables, 
which would have no more foundation in fact than the Meta- 
morphoses of Ovid. 

Fifth — There still remains what is specially called the rationa- 
listic mode of interpretation. If this mode of interpretation 
differs from the others already described, it is in dealing more 
summarily with whatever is supposed to contradict reason in the 
sacred volume. If anything in scripture appears to them in- 
consistent with what they think the dictates of reason ; as would 
be, they say, any miraculous work or real prophecy ; then, if 
they cannot at once discover some perverse mode of explaining 
away the clear statement of the text, the doctors of this school 
unceremoniously set aside the testimony of the inspired writer. 

Thus, we see how all these rationalistic systems agree in 
wilfully and impiously misinterpreting the holy word of God. 
And, lest it might be said that we have exaggerated the impious 

a 



226 OF THE RATIONALISTIC SYSTEM OE HEEMENEUTICS. 



extravagance of these systems in this brief statement of their 
characteristics, let it be observed, that to whatever subterfuges 
the authors of these systems may occasionally have recourse 
for the purpose of concealing somewhat their hideous impiety, 
still there is nothing here stated which is not fully admitted, 
even by the Protestant writers who have criticised the produc- 
tions of the Rationalist School. Ve may refer to Dr. Davidson, 
in his Sacred Hermeneutics (chapter 7th.) The following is the 
censure passed upon these interpreters, in a Protestant work 
already more than once referred to — The State of Protestantism in 
Germany. By the Rev. Hugh James Rose. — u jSo language can 
describe the disgust with which page after page of the commen- 
taries on scripture by this party is turned over, and page after 
page supplies fresh instances of the defiance of every law of 
thought, of sense, of language, and of truth. I would refer to 
any of these commentators — to Hezel, for example, or Augusti, 
or Eckermann, or, as an extreme instance, to those of Paulus, 
a professor of theology, and in them I would desire no selection 
of any especial absurdity ; but, I would venture to say, that the 
explanation of the first miracle which shall occur will present 
an example of improbable reasoning, and false misapplied philo- 
logy, such as no church, no nation, no age, can furnish, except 
the philosophical school of divinity, erected in the Protestant 
church of Germany, in the eighteenth century." (Page 129, 
and following. Second edition.) 

It yet remains, that we say a word or two of the system of 
interpietation followed by the Pietist school in Germany. The 
Pietists, like the Quakers, have but little regard for the external 
words of scripture. They refer everything to the inward light, 
which, they say, is the guide to true faith and pure morality. 
Hence, according to this system, the obvious meaning of the 
text is, in a great measure, overlooked, and vague and arbitrary 
meanings are affixed to the words of scripture according to the 
fancies of individuals. In fact, the feelings rather than the 
understanding are consulted, and followed as a guide to the 
meaning. It is unnecessary to dwell further upon a system 
which opens the door to the wildest fanaticism. 

Having now seen the result of the principle of private judg- 
ment, when applied to the interpretation of scripture, we behold 
in this a striking confirmation of the excellence of the Catholic 
system of hermeneutics, which, whilst it avails itself of every 
reasonable aid for the discovery of the sense of the scripture, is 
careful never to emancipate itself from that authority which 
Christ has established in His church, to preserve inviolate the 
deposit of faith to the end of time. " Go," said our Eedeemer 



OF THE SYSTEM OF HERMENETJTICS, ETC. 



227 



to His apostles, and in them to their successors, " go teach all 
nations .... and behold I am with you all days, even to the 
consummation of the world. " — St. Matt., xxviii, 19, 20. 



CHAPTER YIL 

SOME OBSERVATIONS UPON THE FOREGOING CHAPTER OF THE SYSTEM 

OF HERMENEUTICS TAUGHT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

Notwithstanding the observations with which we have ac- 
companied our brief notice of the Rationalistic systems of biblical 
interpretation, we feel that we almost owe an apology to the 
Catholic reader for having noticed them at all ; so blasphemously 
irreverent are they towards that sacred volume, which is one of 
the greatest gifts conferred upon man by the Father of lights and 
God of all consolation. But, we wished to show the unsound- 
ness of the great Protestant principle, the right of private judg- 
ment in the interpretation of the scripture, by exhibiting this 
principle in certain advanced stages of its development. For, 
as the development of any plant tests the quality of the seed 
from which it springs ; so does the development of a principle 
test the soundness of that principle. It is no answer to say, 
that the Rationalists abuse the right of private judgment — and, 
that we might as well condemn human liberty because so many 
abuse it. Por, how are we to know whether or not a certain 
line of conduct be the use or abuse of the principle to which it 
is attributed ? By asking ourselves, whether, if we admit the 
principle, we can consistently deny the right to follow the line 
of conduct in question. Por, if the conduct in question be an 
abuse of the principle, then we can, even admitting the principle, 
deny the right to act in such a manner. Now, what consistent 
Protestant can deny to a German commentator the right to 
adopt the views respecting the scripture which have been des- 
cribed in the foregoing chapter ? Take, for example, that man 
who was so well known in Germany in late years, by the name 
of Doctor Paulus, doctor and professor of theology . Suppose, that 
Paulus had been called upon to defend his views of scripture 
against some one who had stopped much shorter than he did in 
the career of Protestant development : would he not have been 
justified, on Protestant principles, in saying to such a one — 
" You may differ from my interpretation of scripture, you may 
condemn my views, but you cannot consistently condemn myself 
for adopting these views?" "Por," he might say, "these 
views are the result of the application of my private judgment 



228 



OF THE SYSTEM OP HERMEWEUTICS 



to the explanation of scripture; and, remember, when the ancient 
church condemns you and me for our views respectively, as re- 
gards the meaning of scripture, we are defended on a common 
principle — the right of private judgment. As, therefore, you 
defend yourself against the ancient church by asserting your 
right to be guided by your own judgment in these matters ; in the 
same way do I defend myself against you, by asserting my right 
to follow my own judgment ; and if you deny me this privilege, 
vou are not a true Protestant, but an inquisitor in disguise. " 
All genuine Protestants would have pronounced this defence to 
be triumphant ; and, in point of fact, although Paulus was so 
often and so severely attacked by Protestant writers, yet the 
stvle and title of doctor and professor of theology which he claimed 
on Protestant principles, was never withheld from him by these 
adversaries. And, what kind of man was Paulus ? And, what 
are we to think of the principles which would justify such a 
man in claiming the title of doctor and professor of theology ? 
Why, Paulus was a man who taught his pupils, that in the 
whole scripture, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Reve- 
lations, not one real m iracle or real prophecy was recorded. He was 
a man who taught his pupils to treat the manifestations of the 
power and knowledge of God in the scripture with less respect 
than did the magicians of Egypt treat the miracles of Closes ; for, 
the magicians admitted that the finger of God was there (Exod. 
viii, 19) ; an admission that Paulus never made in commenting 
on the miracles or prophecies of the bible. We ask any candid 
reader, is there not a certain degree of blasphemy against the 
holv name of God, in giving to such a man the title of professor 
of //oology ? If he had been styled professor of demonoiogy, we 
could understand the reason of the appellation. And, now 
because the teaching of the Catholic Church alone effectually 
guards the scripture against such perversions of its meaning 
as those upon which we are commenting ; for such teaching is 
that church calumniated every day in the most popular treatises 
upon what is called Protestant divinity. We might adduce 
numerous examples of this. Take, for example, the following 
from the Lectures on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible, 
bv Dr. Marsh, not many years ago Protestant bishop of Peter- 
borough — a work that has been repeatedly printed. In a lecture 
on the interpretation of the bible, he says, (and we give the 
italics of the author) " Shall we imitate the Church of Rome, 
and. rejecting the aid of human learning, resolve the interpreta- 
tion of scripture into the decrees of a council, on the presumption 
that it interprets under the influence of the spirit, and, therefore, 
that its inteipretations are infallible? Or shall we imitate the 



TAUGHT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



229 



modern enthusiast, who likewise rejects the aid of human learning, 
who likewise aspires to the influence of the spirit, and acting on 
the same principles as the Church of Borne, determines with equal 
ease, and with equal confidence in his own decisions? Or shall we 
follow the example of our Reformers, who, when they had rejected 
tradition as a guide to the meaning of scripture, supplied the 
place of that tradition by reason and learning ?" — p. 312, edition 
of 1842, London. As to what is here said about the Church of 
Eome rejecting the aid of human learning, for one who knew 
so well as Marsh that the Church of Eome has furnished many 
of the most learned commentators, this part of his statement is 
to be considered simply as fabulous — a mere myth on the part 
of the learned author. As to what he says about resolving the 
interpretation of scripture into the decrees of a council ; we have 
already explained to what extent tradition and the infallibility 
of the church control, and justly control, the interpreter of 
scripture. Eut it would be very hard to discover what precise 
ideas Marsh attached here to the words reason and learning. 
This, however, we do know, that the most profane interpreters 
of scripture which German Protestantism has produced, have 
endeavoured to justify their impiety precisely by an appeal to 
reason and learning. Why, their very name of Rationalists is 
derived from the prominent part which they assign to reason in 
the interpretation of the bible. And it is well known that the 
Eationalists look upon themselves as the greatest proficients in 
that kind of learning which the despisers of tradition admire. 
We know, moreover, what ideas these men — such men as Doctor ! ! 
Paulus — attach to reason and learning. With them, reason is 
the intolerable arrogance of the human mind, refusing to admit 
any truth no matter how clearly revealed which exceeds the 
comprehension of its own limited powers, or is opposed to its 
preconceived notions : and learning is the substitution of the 
Lexicographers for the Holy Fathers; a dealing in fanciful ety- 
mologies ; together with a great parade of antiquarian research, 
respecting the beasts, and birds, and vegetables, and such like 
subjects mentioned in the scripture. These men have a great 
ambition to merit that praise given to Solomon, where it is said, 
" He treated about trees, from the cedar, that is in Libanus, 
unto the hyssop that cometh out of the wall : and he discoursed 
of beasts, and of fowls, and of creeping things, and of fishes. " 
(3 Kings, iv, 33.) ,In their hands the scripture is made to teach 
philosophy — according to their system, grammar — also upon a 
plan of their of their own, natural history, geography, every 
thing, in a word, except its principal subject — theology. 

The true system of Catholic hermeneutics — which, whilst it 



230 



OF THE SYSTEM OF HERMENETJTICS 



assigns their proper place and due importance to reason and 
learning, pays also a due respect to tradition and the teaching of 
the church — is clearly pointed out in the New Testament. 
Indeed, so clearly, that it would be wonderful to us how any 
one could fail to perceive it, did we not remember that the re- 
ception of sound doctrine belongs to the gift of faith, which 
proceeds from the grace of God. The grand feature which dis- 
tinguishes Catholic hermeneutics from every other system of 
interpretation, is this — that Catholics hold that there is in the 
Church of Christ a certain standard of interpretation, distinct both 
from the scripture itself and the private judgment of the reader, to 
which standard all interpretation of the scripture must conform. 
This standard has positively declared the meaning of some parts 
of the scripture, and in these parts of scripture this meaning must 
be given to the sacred text. As to the other parts of scripture, 
which are not positively explained by this standard, we must 
take care not to give to these parts of scripture any meaning 
which would be opposed to this standard. Behold the great dis- 
tinguishing feature of Catholic biblical interpretation. I said 
that we would find this doctrine in the New Testament. When 
our Redeemer founded His church, He made it the depository 
of those ancient scriptures which, before, had been intrusted to 
the Jewish church. (Romans, iii, 2.) To these the scriptures of 
the New Testament were afterwards added. What now is our 
standard of interpretation, extrinsic loth to this bible and to our 
own private judgment ? It is, that body of doctrine of which the 
apostolic teaching was composed. That body of doctrine which 
St. Paul delivered to the churches which he founded ; which St. 
Peter delivered to the churches which he founded ; and so on of 
the other apostles. How has this body of doctrine which the 
apostles delivered, been preserved in the church ? — By tradition. 
How has this body of doctrine been kept free from any admixture 
of error, at every point of time, since the days of the apostles ? 
— By the infallibility of the actual church, at each point of time, 
from its foundation to the end of the world. For, this is the 
proper function of the infallibility of the actual church subse- 
quent to the days of the apostles ; not to make known to us any 
new revelation, but to teach us infallibly what has been the 
apostolic doctrine. By means of this standard or rule — which is 
the apostolic doctrine, or doctrine delivered to the church by the 
apostles — unity of faith is preserved. And truly, the Divine 
Pounder of the church attached the greatest importance to this 
unity of faith. For, He has proclaimed to us by His apostle, 
that His Church is one body, having one faith. {See Epistle to 
the Ephesians, iv, 4, 5.) This body of doctrine of which we 



TAUGHT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



231 



speak, was communicated by Christ to His apostles, when He 
prepared them to execute that commission, to go and teach all 
nations. (St. Matthew, xxviii, 19.) The apostles then knew 
at once that it would be unlawful to attach to any part of the 
bible a meaning which would be irreconcilable with the truth of 
any part of the doctrine which Christ had commissioned them to 
teach. Here, then, we behold, in the hands of the apostles, the 
standard or rule by which the lawfulness of any interpretation of 
the scripture was to be tested. If, in the days of the apostles, 
any one had wished to know whether a certain meaning which 
he was disposed to attach to a text of scripture could be lawfully 
attached to it, he could have learned this from any of the apos- 
tles by asking him — " Would such a meaning be at variance with 
the truth of any part of the doctrine which you have received 
from Christ ? " If the apostle had answered that it would, then 
it would have been a duty instantly to reject such a meaning, 
no matter how plausible it might have appeared. So far, all is 
clear. Eut was this standard or rule lost to the church when the 
last of the apostles died ? — By no means. This rule or standard, 
that is, the body of apostolic doctrine, was a deposit in the hands 
of the apostles, which they were to commit, or deliver over to 
trustworthy persons, who were, in turn, to deliver it over to 
others, and in this way it was to be perpetuated in the church. 
Let us turn to St. Paul. "We read in the Acts of the Apostles 
(xx) how the apostle, when passing up to Jerusalem, assembled 
at Miletus the neighbouring bishops of Asia, and addressed them 
upon their duties ; he says, " I have not spared to declare unto 
you all the counsel of God. Take heed to yourselves and to the 
whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops 

I know, that after my departure ravening wolves will 

enter in among you and of your own selves shall arise men 

speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them." 
(Acts, xx, 27, 28, 29, 30.) We find the apostle here reminding 
these pastors of the church that he had made them the deposi- 
taries of the whole counsel of God (natvLv tt)v BovXrjv), that is, 
the whole doctrine of the gospel ; and he warns them to guard 
against perverse teaching, that is, any teaching opposed to this 
counsel of God, this apostolic doctrine. St. Timothy, the beloved 
disciple of St. Paul, was an illustrious depository of this rule or 
standard — this body of doctrine of which we speak. Thus St. 
Paul addresses this bishop, Timothy — " As I desired thee to re- 
main at Ephesus when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest 
charge some not to teach otherwise, nor to give heed to fables 
and genealogies without end, which minister questions, rather 
than the edification of God, which is in faith." (1 Timothy, i, 



232 



OP THE SYSTEM OF HERMENETTTICS 



3, 4.) In these fables and genealogies there is reference to the 
Judaizing teachers, or to the precursors of the Gnostic heretics. 
How was Timothy to treat these ? He was to charge them not 
to teach otherwise. To teach otherwise is, in Greek, one word, 
sTSPodidct6'Aci\s/v, which means to teach a different doctrine. 
[Now, we ask, different from what ? The answer is obvious, dif- 
ferent from the apostolic doctrine. And this is the meaning 
which the Protestant, Bloomfield, gives to the word. See, then, 
how St. Timothy, who was neither an apostle nor an inspired 
writer, was yet the depositary of a test or standard, by which he 
would know what interpretation of the Old Testament he would 
tolerate in a preacher, and what interpretation he would prescribe 
and denounce. Again, St. Paul writes to Timothy — "If any 
man teach otherwise, and consent not to the sound words of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, and to that doctrine which is according to 
godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but sick about questions 
and strifes of words: from which arise envies, contentions, 
blasphemies, evil suspicions.'' (1 Timothy, i, 3, 4.) Here we 
have the same Greek word, expressing to ceach otherwise, or to 
teach a different doctrine ; but he points out, moreover, what the 
false doctrine, or false interpretation of scripture differs from ; 
from the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ — those words 
which Christ addressed to St. Paul when He Himself vouchsafed 
to instruct the apostle of the Gentiles in the gospel (Galatians, 
i, 12); and which words St. Paul delivered to his disciple, St. 
Timothy. Again, St. Paul writing to Timothy, calls upon him 
in the most earnest manner " To guard the deposit (rr\\, naza- 
Qrixyjv), avoiding profane and vain words, and oppositions (or 
antitheses), of a knowledge falsely so called, which some pro- 
fessing, erred concerning the faith." (1 Timothy, vi, 20, 21.) 
Here St. Timothy is a^ain reminded that he is the depository of 
the sound doctrine — the apostolic doctrine. He is warned to 
guard this deposit most cautiously, even against being sullied by 
profane novelties of ivords ; and he is specially warned against 
those who, laying claim to a great knoivledge, hesitated not to 
attack this deposit, and to introduce error concerning the faith. 
St. Paul, in this word knowledge points to the Gnostic heresies, 
which were then commencing. They took their name from the 
Greek word yvojcig, which signifies knowledge. The Gnostics 
were persons who, like Dr. Marsh and the Reformers, rejected 
tradition, that is, the doctrine delivered by the apostles to the 
churches which they founded ; and which doctrine the apostles 
committed in trust to Timothy and the other bishops who were 
to succeed them as depositaries of the said doctrine. In place of 
this tradition the Gnostics, like Dr. Marsh and the Reformers, 



TAUGHT IN THE 2TEW TESTAITRXT. 



233 



would substitute reason and learning, which they called by one 
word, knowledge ; knowledge being the result of the combination 
of learning with reason. We come now to the second Epistle to 
Timothy, where we read as follows, " Thou, therefore, my son, 
be strong in the grace which is in Christ Jesus : and the things 
which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same intrust 
to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also." (2 Timo- 
thy, ii, 1, 2.) Here St. Paul reminds Timothy that when he 
(St. Paul) gave him his episcopal consecration he, at the same 
time, solemnly delivered to him the body of gospel-doctrine, 
whereof he, Timothy, as a bishop, was constituted a depositary ; 
this doctrine he delivered to him in the presence of many wit- 
nesses. He now tells Timothy to look out for other depositaries, 
to whom this doctrine shall be intrusted. The Greek word 
which we here translate by intrust is tc^o^ou, the verb from 
which.it is derived xapaQri"/.r h deposit. As the principal quality 
required in a depositary is fidelity to his trust, hence, Timothy 
is told to seek out faithful men for the office in question. We 
see now how the standard of sound doctrine, and consequently, 
of sound interpretation of the scripture was to be continued in 
the church. . Titus was another of these depositaries constituted 
by St. Paul. Thus St. Paul writes to him — " A man that is a 
heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid." (Epis. to 
Titus, iii, 10.) How was Titus to know the heretic f — By means 
of the deposit — the standard, which he had in his hands. Let 
us hear a Protestant commentator on the sense of cjupsrr/toz (here- 
tic), in this place. Bloomfield gives it the meaning of " one 
who takes up any doctrine in opposition to, or inconsistent with 
the fundamental truths of the gospel." We ask, by what right 
does Bloomfield put in the word fundamental here ? As if it 
were a slight matter to impugn the veracity of Christ and His 
apostles as regards any truth of the gospel ! ! j$o, the heretic is 
any one who will not submit his own judgment to the judgment 
of the church of Christ as regards this deposit of which we speak, 
and as regards any truth contained in this deposit ; which deposit 
contains all the truths of the gospel. 

This rule or standard of sound doctrine and of sound inter- 
pretation of scripture shall continue in the church of Christ to 
the end of the world : for, when Christ told his apostles to go 
and teach all nations this doctrine. He added, that He would be 
with them all days, even to the consummation of the world, (Mat- 
thew, xxviii, 19, 20.) Therefore, the apostolic doctrine, which 
was taught first by the apostles and afterwards by their succes- 
sors, the pastors of the Church, was to continue in the church to 
the end of the world. And as this doctrine is to be believed, 



234 



or the system or hermexeutics 



and not to be merely matter of opinion, it is necessary that it should 
be always known with certainty in the church, and therefore it is 
necessary that there should be always an infallible authority to 
make it known to us : because, a fallible authority could not point 
it out with certainty. Then there will be at all times in the church 
an unerring standard of judgment, distinct from the scripture it- 
self, and from the private judgment of the individual ; by which 
standard we can know what interpretation of scripture may be 
tolerated, and what interpretation must be rejected. 

St. Paul, in his own time, told the Galatians to use this stan- 
dard. After he had planted the faith among the Galatians, some 
Judaizing teachers came to endeavour to pervert these new 
Christians. St. Paul wrote an epistle to them, lamenting that 
these false teachers had been allowed to make such progress 
among them. Let us suppose that the Galatians attended to 
the instructions conveyed in that epistle, and let us suppose that 
after they received it one of these Judaizing teachers appeared 
among them. This teacher, like those who went before him 
in the unholy work, would attack tradition, that is, the doctrine 
delivered to the churches of Galatia by St. Paul ; he would 
appeal to scripture — to those many texts of the Old Testament, 
which, to a superficial reader, would appear to say that the 
ceremonies of the law were to be of perpetual obligation ; 
perhaps he would also quote, in a wrong sense, some texts of 
St. Matthew's Gospel. To all this the Galatians would answer : 
" it is unnecessary for us to enter into any discussion with you, 
or into any examination of these scripture texts ; it is enough for 
us to know that the interpretation which you put upon these 
texts is at variance with St. Paul's doctrine, which he preached 
to us ; for St. Paul has pronounced anathema against any one 
who will teach any doctrine at variance with what he has 
taught." (Galat, i, 8, 9.) In like manner, at the present 
day, if the faithful are attacked by false teachers, they will 
defend themselves by adhering firmly to the doctrine delivered by 
the apostles; and any interpretation of the scripture, which would 
come against this doctrine — this tradition, which is preserved 
in the church, they will unhesitatingly reject. Our adversaries 
will tell us that times are changed since the days of St. Paul, 
because now the apostles are all dead, and the writings of the 
^ew Testament are complete. But we say that these changes 
by no means prove that a standard of sound doctrine and of 
sound interpretation of the scripture, distinct from the scripture 
itself and the private judgment of the individual, has disappeared 
from the church. The unity of the faith requires its continu- 
ance ; and the whole economy of the institution of the church, 



TAUGHT m THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



235 



and of the pastoral office, proclaims the truth, that it shall con- 
tinue to the consummation of the world. Hence we find this 
standard applied by the church in the case of the Reformers. 
When the Reformers came they rejected tradition, that is, they 
denied that the deposit of apostolic doctrine was preserved in the 
church, except inasmuch as it was contained in the scripture, 
where each Christian was to find it by the help of his own 
private judgment. They denied that this deposit was preserved 
after the manner of a deposit, that is, by being handed down 
through a succession of depositaries, who, having received and 
learned it from those who went before them, made it known 
and intrusted it to others, who were to succeed them in the 
guardianship of it. This living tradition, which was distinct 
from the written word, the Reformers rejected, because they 
knew that this tradition condemned them. On the other hand, 
the Catholic Church, attentive to the lesson taught by St. Paul 
in his Epistle to the Galatians, explained the deposit of the apos- 
tolic doctrine as regarded the teaching of the Eeformers, and 
declared that any one was to be anathema who would assert 
such and such doctrines opposed to tradition, that is, opposed to 
the deposit of apostolic doctrine preserved in the church. See 
the Council of Trent. 

We shall conclude this chapter by observing, that high 
Protestant authority can be adduced in proof of the congruity of 
such a dispensation of Providence as the Catholic system of 
biblical interpretation insists upon. The Protestant Arch- 
bishop of Dublin, Dr. Whately, in an address to his clergy, in 
1836, upon the subject of which we are treating, has the follow- 
ing : — " The diversities, indeed, and errors to which private 
judgment is liable, in all matters not admitting of mathematical 
demonstration, might naturally lead some persons following their 
own conjectures to suppose, that in a divine dispensation a pro- 
vision is requisite, and, therefore, to be expected, for a power 
of infallibly interpreting scripture, and deciding finally all 
questions that may arise ; to be permanently established on earth 
in some person or body, whose authority should be ascertained 
and supported by unquestionable miracles." — p. 81. We have 
explained already what is meant, when we say that the church 
infallibly interprets the scripture. And here we have a man of 
Dr. Whately's philosophical mind, admitting that it is natural to 
suppose that God would have furnished His church with such an 
authority as we contend for. In what he adds about miracles, 
he appears to insinuate that each dogma of the Christian religion 
requires a special set of miracles in proof of itself in particular : 
So that we are to ask, where are the miracles in proof of the 



236 



OF THE MANJTEB OF SETTING FOETH 



necessity of grace ? Where are the miracles, in proof of the 
Trinity of Persons in the Godhead ? Where are the miracles, 
in proof of the Unity of Person in Christ ? and so on. This is, 
indeed, striking out a new path in Christian theology. We say 
that this infallible authority of the church is a prominent and 
leading doctrine of the Christian religion, and therefore that it 
is sustained by all those miracles upon which the Christian 
religion rests. We admit that although philosophy can enable 
a man to see the congruity of this dispensation of Providence, 
faith is required to believe in its existence. And this explains 
why it is that Dr. Whately should go on to assure his clergy 
most positively that God has not done, (that is, in his opinion,) 
what the whole Catholic church has always believed that He 
has done. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

OIS T THE MANNER OF SETTING FOETH TO OTHERS THE SENSE OF THE 

SCRIPTURE. 

The interpreter of scripture must not imagine that with the sole 
investigation of the sense of scripture his task concludes : the 
duty still remains for him to convey to others what he has now, 
by the application of the proper rules, learned himself. We 
must observe here, that we do not treat of that popular interpre- 
tation of scripture which belongs to the preacher or catechist. The 
interpreter of scripture, strictly so called, with whose duty we 
are concerned, must adopt some one, of four different forms or 
modes of conveying the sense of the sacred volume ; for he 
must either propose to himself (first), to render the original text 
into some other language ; or he must propose to himself to re- 
move the obscurity of the sacred text ; either (second), by re- 
taining the form of a continued narrative or discourse, and adding 
explanations as it were in the name of the sacred author ; or 
by subjoining notes, by which the sense of the text will be 
illustrated ; and in these he will either (third), confine himself 
to a single explanation of the sense, omitting, or but slightly 
referring to the reasons upon which his interpretation rests ; or 
(fourth), he will purpose to explain the sense at length, as well 
as to give the reasons by which it is proved that the sense which 
he assigns to the text is genuine. In the first case, he will give 
a version ; in the second, a paraphrase ; in the third, scholia or 
notes ; and in the fourth, a commentary . 



THE SENSE OE THE SCRIPTURE. 



237 



Eirst. — In a version, what one must attend to is principally 
fidelity, not only in the matter, but also in the form — that is to 
say, the translator must not only convey the sense of the original, 
but he must, moreover, retain the style and manner of the 
original, as far as the genius of the language into which he 
translates will at all admit. In one word, the translator of the 
scripture ought to change nothing but the language. Hence, if 
words are ambiguous in the original, the ambiguity ought to 
be preserved in the translation. We must observe, however, 
that it does not follow that because a version is excessively 
literal, it is, therefore, to the same extent faithful ; for, seeing 
that languages differ so much in their idiomatic construction, this 
exceeding great literality may be attended with obscurity, and hence 
lead to mistakes about the sense of the original. At the same time 
an over free version is less likely to be faithful than that which is 
over literal; for, if the version which is too literal leaves an 
obscurity about the sense of the original, that which is over free 
goes farther, and easily conveys a false meaning to the reader. 
"We may remark that the defects of the ancient versions are 
generally on the side of too great a literality, whilst the defects 
of modern versions are almost all on the side of an over-freedom 
of translation. The person who would qualify himself to give a 
good and faithful version of the bible, must be convinced, in the 
first place, that he who undertakes to give such a version, under- 
takes a work of no ordinary difficulty. In order to be prepared 
for it, he must be perfect master both of the original language — 
or of the language from which he translates — and of the language 
into which he translates. He must not only know perfectly the 
meaning of the words in both languages, but he must, moreover, 
be well acquainted with the idioms of these languages. He 
must be an excellent theologian, as otherwise he might easily 
admit into his version a sense, which would be not only incorrect, 
but heterodox. He must be well acquainted with the archaiology 
of the bible — or the Jewish antiquities. Without this know- 
ledge, the force and meaning of several words and phrases in 
the original text would escape him. In brief, if we compare 
together the respective labours of the translator, the paraphrast, 
the annotator, and the commentator, we shall find that the labour 
of the translator requires the highest qualifications, because it is 
attended with far the greatest difficulty in the performance. The 
paraphrast, annotator, and commentator, will often meet with 
passages of the sacred author where the sense may be readily 
seized by the reader of scripture, without his finding it necessary 
to recur to note or comment, or even paraphrase, to make it 
clearer than it is. But the path of the translator is beset with 



:238 



OF THE MANN EE OF SETTING FORTH 



difficulties at every step : he must consider well every passage 
and every word as they stand in the language from which he 
translates : and he must wisely balance these with the corres- 
ponding words and passages which he gives us in his version. 
In a preceding part of this work we have spoken of the merits 
of the principal ancient and modern versions as fully as the 
limits which we have fixed for ourselves in this introduction 
would permit. 

We come now to speak of the paraphrase. Its object is, to 
remove the obscurity, which still conceals from us, more or less, 
the meaning of the sacred author, even after we have made our- 
selves acquainted (by means of a version, if necessary), with the 
language in which he wrote. An accurate version will neither 
increase nor diminish the obscurity which it is the aim of a 
paraphrase to remove. The paraphrase is a fuller and clearer 
explanation of the inspired word set forth in the name of the 
sacred author. Knowing the object of the paraphrase, we easily 
perceive the qualities which ought to recommend it. First, it 
ought to be faithful; for it is the sense of the scripture, not the 
notions of the interpreter, which the reader seeks to know. 
"When the meaning of a passage in the text is ambiguous, since 
only one sense can be given by the paraphrase the other ought to 
be added in a note in the margin, or at the end of the verse. 
The paraphrase ought also to adhere faithfully to the forms of 
expression of the text, as far as attention to this point can be 
combined with perspicuity ; for to give the sense perspicuously 
must be the great aim of the paraphrast. We, therefore, put it 
clown as the second quality required in a paraphrase, that it be 
perspicuous. It is for the very purpose of consulting for this 
perspicuity that the circumlocutory form of expression is used. 
The paraphrast, then, must illustrate the sense of the text, 
wherever he sees that the strangeness of the matter would be 
without such illustration an occasion of misconception. He 
ought to change metaphors into comparisons ; concise and preg- 
nant expressions he ought to evolve ; and the leading proposi- 
tions of the sacred writer he ought to set forth more conspi- 
cuously. Finally, a paraphrase ought to be succinct, that is to 
say, it ought not to heap together words when a few words would 
equally well express the sense. An unnecessary multiplication 
of words ought to be everywhere avoided, but particularly in a 
paraphrase where such verbosity, so far from rendering the sense 
more clear, would, on the contrary, often be an additional cause 
of obscurity. The best specimen of a paraphrase on the scrip- 
ture to which we can refer is the paraphrase on the Epistles of 



THE SENSES OF THE SCBTPTTJKE. 



239 



St. Paul, by Bernardinus a Piconio, in his work so well known 
by the name of Triplex JExpositio. 

Notes, or scholia as they are sometimes called, are brief 
observations, illustrative of the sense of the text, and written 
apart from the text. It is the duty of the annotator, Pirst — To 
explain obscure words. Secondly — To explain the matter of the 
text, as often as the strangeness or obscurity of the matter ren- 
ders such explanation necessary. Thirdly — To point out briefly 
the principal idea of the sacred writer, the connexion of his 
thoughts and arguments, the parallelism, the various readings, 
the discrepancies between the ancient versions. Fourthly — In 
the more difficult passages to give in a few words the reasons 
upon which his interpretation rests. The work of the annotator 
ought to be marked by fidelity, and also by brevity as far as the 
latter quality can be combined with sufficient perspicuity. 
Among those who have written notes upon the scripture, the 
Jesuit Mariana holds a distinguished place. In his learned 
scholia he has illustrated by far the greater part of the entire 
scripture. 

By the biblical commentary we understand a full and erudite 
explanation of the sense of the scripture, confirmed and sustained 
by solid arguments. Like the scholia or notes, the commentary 
is written apart from the text ; although both a version and a 
paraphrase may find a place in commentaries. The difference 
between notes and a commentary consists in this, that the latter 
is more diffuse, and dwells at much greater length upon the 
arguments by which it is proved that the sense ascribed to the 
text is the true and proper one. Since the commentary is the 
most complete form of biblical interpretation, hence, it will be 
expected to contain — Pirst, a preface or introduction to the ex- 
planation of the particular book of scripture of which there may 
be question. This introduction ought to furnish us with that 
preliminary knowledge so essential for the right understanding 
of the book ; that is, it ought to inform us who was the author 
(if that can be known) ; who were the first readers of the book ; 
what was the occasion ; and what is the scope of the book. It 
ought to inform us what the subject matter of the book is, and 
what is its general arrangement ; in other words it ought to pre- 
sent to us an analysis of the theme, as it is termed. Pinally, 
this introduction ought to tell us in what language the book was 
written, and what is the general character of its style. 

Second. — The commentary ought to contain a notice of such 
various readings as affect the sense, wherever these may occur. 
It ought also to decide upon the value of these, according to the 
rules of sound criticism : for the genuine reading must first be 



240 OP THE MAXXER OE SETTING EOKTEt 

determined before one proceeds to inquire into the sense of what 
is said. 

Third. — 'Wherever the us ape of language is uncertain or vague 
it ought to be determined, as far as may be. by the citation of 
testimonies : or, if needs be, it ought to be illustrated by the 
etymology of the word, or the analogy of the language. 

Fourth. — In general, wherever a passage is obscure or am- 
biguous, it is there the duty of the commentator to show how the 
hermeneutical criteria, internal and external, concur in deciding 
in favour of that sense which he attributes to the passage. 

Fifth. — Things slightly touched upon or left to be understood, 
having been passed over in silence because well known to the 
first readers — such matters being no longer immediately obvious 
to every one — such are historical, geographical, and political 
matters. &e. — these and such like matters ought to be explained, 
if possible, iu the very words of the authors whose testimonies 
the commentator cites in illustration of them. The commentator 
must also direct his special attention to the explanation of the 
imagery and figurative language of the bible. 

Sixth. — The commentator must also take care to clear up any 
apparent contradiction between different parts of the inspired 
word. He must also cautiously distinguish those instructions or 
admonitions which are to be understood with some moditication, 
or are of a temporary character, from such as are absolute and 
of perpetual obligation, and acknowledged as such by the 
church. 

Seventh. — Wherever a passage has been interpreted in dif- 
ferent ways, if the commentator should adopt some one interpre- 
tation in preference to the rest, it will be his duty to notice the 
ether interpretations which have probable reasons to recommend 
them. He will not omit, at the same time, to point out the 
reasons which induce him to give a preference to that interpre- 
tation which he adopts. 

Eighth. — Finally, the commentator will notice briefly the 
use of the passage in a catechetical and ascetic point of view. 
This will be of great service to clerical readers, for whose benefit 
in a more special manner commentaries are generally written. 

The qualities by which a good commentary will be recom- 
mended are — First. Fidelity, not only in properly determining 
and proposing the sense of the scripture, but also in regard to 
the illustrations brought from other sources of knowledge. The 
necessity of this quality is manifest. 

Second. — A singular perspicuity, as without this the diffuse- 
ness with distinguishes the commentary frorn scholia or notes 
would fail to attain its object. 



THE SENSE OF THE SCEIPTTJKE. 



241 



Third. — A good commentary ought to be complete, that is to 
say, it ought to contain every thing that is required in order 
to determine and set forth in a clear light the meaning of the 
text. It ought, moreover, to contain a full statement of the 
arguments by which the interpretation is established, as well as 
a satisfactory solution of the difficulties urged against it. 

Fourth. — The commentary ought to be succinct ; hence words 
ought not to be multiplied without necessity ; nor should there 
be an unnecessary display of erudition, which tends rather to 
fatigue the reader than to illustrate the sense of the scripture. 

Some might think that this would be a fitting place for 
treating of the principal commentators on the scripture. How- 
ever, considering that so few have written on the entire scripture, 
we think that a notice of the commentators belongs rather to a 
particular introduction to the several books of which the sacred 
volume is made up. At the same time that we may not conclude 
this chapter without referring to some specimen of the commen- 
tary, we shall observe that, in our humble judgment, the most 
complete and able commentary on the scripture to be found in 
any language is that of Estius, on the Epistles of St. Paul. 
Eut whilst we assign this high place to that commentary, we 
must not be understood as at all assenting to the extreme 
opinions upon grace and predestination which the author so 
frequently advances. 

Example. — As we subjoined to our dissertation on biblical 
criticism an example illustrative of the rules there laid down, 
so it may be useful here, too, to bring forward as an illustration 
of our rules the interpretation of some passage of scripture. 
"We shall select the commencement of the 20th chapter of 
Exodus, 1 — 6, which is thus read in the Douay version : — 
"4. And the Lord spoke all these words : 2. I am the Lord thy 
God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the 
house of bondage. 3. Thou shall not have strange Gods before 
me. 4. Thou shall not make thyself a graven thing, nor the 
likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or in the earth 
beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the 
earth. 5. Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them : I am 
the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the 
fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation 
of them that hate me : 6. And showing mercy unto thousands, 
to them that love me and keep my commandments." In the 
Protestant authorised version the same passage is read as fol- 
lows : — " 1. And God spake all these words, saying: 2. I am 
the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of 
Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3. Thou shalt have no 

E 



242 



OE THE MANNEK OE SETTING FORTH 



other Gods before me. 4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any 
graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven 
above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water 
under the earth. 5. -Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, 
nor serve them: for I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God, 
visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the 
third and fourth generation of them that hate me. 6. And 
showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep 
my commandments. " This latter version is faulty in more than 
one particular. But the point which we intend to discuss for 
the present is : whether this passage contains two commandments 
of the decalogue, or only one. 

The opinion which prevails at present among Catholics, we 
may say universally, is, that there is here but one command- 
ment ; whilst all the Protestants of these countries * hold that 
this passage contains two of the commandments. And this 
diversity of opinion has given rise to a calumny against the 
Catholic Church, which, although often refuted, is still repeated ; 
so that it has lived longer than that other calumny respecting 
the suppression of the doxology in the Lord's prayer. The shape 
which this calumny assumes is the following : Protestants say, 
that the second commandment, commencing with the 4th verse 
in this passage, condemns the Catholic usage of making and 
venerating sacred images. They say, moreover, that in Catholic 
catechisms, from which the people are to learn the Christian 
doctrine, this second commandment is suppressed for the pur- 
pose of concealing from the people the violation of the command- 
ment by the aforesaid practice of making and venerating sacred 
images. Before concluding our observations upon the point 
under discussion, we shall explain this matter respecting the 
catechism : and we shall also explain any difference of opinion 
which may exist among Catholic interpreters respecting the 
precise manner of dividing the commandments, as well as res- 
pecting the precise nature of the prohibition laid down in these 
verses. We proceed now to submit to a strict hermeneutical ex- 
amination the question already proposed, viz. : — Do we find in 
the passage quoted two commandments of the decalogue, or only one ? 
We answer, only one ; and, we contend, that not one solid her- 
meneutical principle can be advanced in favour of the other 
opinion. In the scripture we are informed that the number of 
the commandments is ten : they are called the Jen words (Exod., 
xxxiv, 28): but the scripture nowhere tells us by what particu- 
lar mode of dividing these words the number ten is to be made out. 

* The Lutherans divide the commandments as we do. 



THE SENSE OE SCKIPTEEE. 



243 



The guide, of course, to be followed in this division is the dis- 
tinction and difference of objects, either prohibited or commanded. 
Those who make two commandments of the passage which we 
have quoted from Exodus, are obliged, in order to keep to the 
number ten, to make but one commandment of the prohibitions 
against coveting the neighbour's wife, and against coveting the 
neighbour's goods ; and here we find the first argument against 
them. They are altogether astray in uniting these two prohi- 
bitions in one commandment. Every one admits that the 
prohibitions of adultery and theft are two distinct command- 
ments ; because these acts have distinct and very different objects. 
Now, to covet the neighbour's wife is the internal act of adultery, 
according to our Redeemer Himself, in the gospel — " Whosoever 
shall look on a woman to covet her, hath already committed 
adultery with her in his heart." (St. Matt., v, 28.) To covet 
the neighbour's goods is the internal act of theft. Again, the 
distinction and difference of objects is as clearly marked in the 
case of internal acts, as it is in the case of external acts. There- 
fore, by the same rule which makes us look upon the prohibitions 
of adultery and theft as two distinct commandments, we ought to 
look upon the prohibitions against coveting the neighbour's wife, 
and against coveting the neighbour's goods, as two distinct com- 
mandments. A further proof that these internal acts are pro- 
hibited by two distinct precepts, is found in the repetition of the 
words, Thou shalt not covet, which words are used twice — " Thou 
shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife. Thou shalt not covet thy neigh- 
bour's house, nor his servant, nor his handmaid, nor his ox, &c." 
The conclusion is, that since there are two precepts against covet- 
ing, there can be only one precept in the passage under discussion, 
that is, a precept prohibiting all idolatry. Consequently, there 
is no. precept against making and venerating sacred images. 

Against this argument one objection is urged, which is taken 
from the arrangement of the several clauses of the 1 7th verse 
of this 20th chapter of Exodus, which stands thus — " Thou shalt 
not covet thy neighbour's house ; Thou shalt not covet thy 
neighbour's wife, nor his servant, nor his handmaid, nor his ox, 
nor his ass, nor anything that is his." Now, it is said if the 
command not to covet the neighbour's wife were intended to be 
a distinct precept, it would not be inserted thus amidst the 
prohibitions which specify several parts of that property of the 
neighbour which it is forbidden to covet. The answer to this 
objection is, that the clauses of this 17th verse, 20th chapter of 
Exodus, do not stand now as they were written by Moses, 
which is proved thus : We find the ten commandments written 
again in the Book of Deuteronomy, 5th chapter ; and there the 



244 OF THE MATTNEE OF SETTIXG- POETH 

•words. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife are written before 
the words, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house. !Now, the 
ten commandments were proclaimed from Mount Sina, and they 
were written by the finger of God upon the two tables of stone ; 
and these commands against coveting the neighbour's house, and 
against coveting the neighbour's wife, must have been pro- 
claimed from the mount, and arranged upon the tables in some 
one way ; either in that order in which they are found in Deu- 
teronomy, or in that order in which they are found in Exodus, 
in favour of which of these ways of arranging the words shall 
we decide ? Deuteronomy has this in its favour, that it follows 
the order of the prohibition of the external acts ; for, as Thou 
shalt not commit adultery comes before Thou shalt not steal, it is 
natural to suppose that, " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's 
wife," would come before the command not to covet his goods. 
Moreover, the arrangement of these clauses in Deuteronomy, as 
far as we know, has been always the same ; whereas Exodus 
cannot lay claim to uniformity upon this matter. The copy of 
Exodus which the Seventy used had the clauses arranged as 
they are in Deuteronomy ; and hence the Septuagint version, 
both in Exodus and Deuteronomy, has the clause, Thou shalt not 
covet thy neighbour's wife placed first ; and the Christian church 
which, in its commencement almost universally read the scrip- 
tures either in the Septuagint or in versions made from it, has 
always followed this arrangement. ]N"ow, if there are two wit- 
nesses who differ upon a certain point, and that one of these is 
never known to have varied in his statement, whilst the other is 
known to have varied, to which of them will a prudent man 
give the preference ? The answer is obvious. ~We conclude, then, 
that the order of the clauses has been disturbed in Exodus, 
through the negligence of copyists. 

The second argument in favour of our assertion, that there is 
but one commandment in the passage under examination, is taken 
from the words which follow the preceptive part of the passage. 
God, to show that He will not tolerate the violation of what is 
here commanded, declares, that He is a jealous God. Here we 
have jealousy attributed, by a figure, to God. According to 
the custom of the scripture, jealousy, in its proper sense, is 
ascribed peculiarly to the husband ; that is ; of course, the hus- 
band in whom the passion is excited through the apprehension 
of infidelity on the part of his wife. So that, as in several other 
places in the Old Testament, we have here the union between 
God and His chosen people virtually compared to the union 
between husband and wife. And we see by these words that 
the sin which is forbidden in the preceding words, is that sin 



THE SENSE OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



245 



which in scripture language is compared to the infidelity of a 
wife to her husband. Now, that sin is idolatry. This is quite 
clear from numerous passages of the Old Testament. No more 
usual name for idolatry in the denunciations of the prophets 
against it, than fornication. And, although the crime of the 
wile to which there is allusion, is, strictly speaking, adultery, 
yet the scripture does not attend commonly to this distinction ; 
as we learn from the words of our Redeemer, in the Gospel, 
where He terms this infidelity of the wife fornication, " Whoso- 
ever shall put away his wife, excepting the cause of fornication," 
&c. (Matt, v, 32 ; xix, 9.) From what we have said it follows, 
that the crime prohibited in the passage under consideration is 
simply idolatry — all making of idols, and worshipping of false 
gods. Such being the case, there is but one commandment in 
the passage, which, therefore, contains no precept against 
making and venerating sacred images. 

The third argument in favour of our assertion is taken from 
the authority of the Septuagint. The word in the original 
which we translate graven thing, and which the Protestants 
translate graven image, is Pesel ; which word has its precise 
meaning given by the Vulgate, Sculpt He, and by our English 
version, a graven thing. The Pesel, according to scriptural usage, 
means a certain hind of representation or likeness of something 
real or imaginary. To all such likenesses the name Pesel is given, 
because they were usually made by graving, carving, or hewing 
smooth ; although sometimes the Pesel of scripture might have 
been made by fusion, or in some other way. Hence, the following 
part of the fourth verse of this twentieth chapter of Exodus, 
merely specifies different classes of objects, whereof the Pesel 
might be the representation or likeness, viz., celestial objects, 
terrestrial and aquatic objects. To know, then, the sense of the 
entire verse, it is sufficient to know what the Pesel was. Now, 
there is no doubt in the world about the meaning which the 
Septuagint translators have assigned to Pesel. They have trans- 
lated the word, ndajXov ; which word means, indeed, an image, 
but an image of a particular kind, viz., an image which either 
represents a false godj or which is considered to be itself a god. 
This is made perfectly clear by St. Paul, who, addressing the 
well-informed Christians at Corinth, says of himself and them, 
"We know that an idol (si6ojaov), is nothing in the world." 
(I Cor., viii, 4). Now, St. Paul must here give the meaning to 
£idu\ov which we have mentioned. Eor, let us take as an ex- 
ample of the stduXoVf the likeness of some celestial thing ; for 
instance, an image of the sun. Then it could not be said of this 
that it is nothing as to the matter of which it is made ; for, 



246 OF THE OE SETTEXG EOETEt 

under this respect, it is something, either stone, or wood, or 
metal, or some such thing. Again, if we view this as simply an 
image of the sun, we cannot say that it is nothing ; because, 
since the sun has a real existence, it can have a representation, 
but, taking ztdaXov in the sense which I have given it, we see at 
mce how this image of the sun is nothing. If it be looked upon 
god — it is no god. Viewed under such a respect, it is nothing. 
Again, if it be viewed as the representation of that which is ac- 
counted a god, viz., the sun, it is nothing also ; because, the sun has 
no existence as a god ; and of that which has no existence there 
3an be no representation. St. Paul goes on to show us still 
more fully the meaning which he attaches to eiduXov, by saying 
equivalently, that if the zwuXov were anything in the world, there 
would be more gods than one. TTe see, then, what etduXov means 
in St. Paul. ]>ow, it must mean the same thing in the Septua- 
gint version. For, St. Paul puts it down as certain, that well- 
informed Christians at Corinth had no doubt about this meaning 
1 Cor., viii) ; and they certainly would have had doubts about 
it, if the Septuagint had ever used the word in a different sense ; 
for, it was unquestionably in the Septuagint version that the 
Christians at Corinth read the Old Testament. From all that 
we have said it follows, that we have the authority of the Sep- 
tuagint translators for looking upon the fourth verse as merely 
prohibiting all idolatry ; and, therefore, we have their authority 
for saying that there is but one commandment in the passage 
under examination. And when the Septuagint translators 
gave the meaning to this passage which they have ascribed to it, 
they were, doubtless, guided in so doing by the judgment of the 
Jewish Church. 

Our fourth argument in favour of the assertion, that there 
is but one commandment in this passage of Exodus, is derived 
from the fact, that all images of a sacred character were not 
proscribed in the Jewish religion. We might refer to several 
instances of the use of images in connexion with the worship of 
God in the old law. The two following, however, very re- 
markable instances will be sufficient for our purpose here. The 
first of these is the cherubim of the sanctuary: Of all the places set 
apart for the worship of God in the Jewish Church, the most holy 
was the sanctuary, or sanctum sanctorum, first, of the tabernacle, 
and afterwards of the temple, This its very name indicates. 
This was the place of the special presence of God among his 
chosen people. As Jerusalem was the city of the Great King, 
XLatt. v, 35,) so the mercy-seat of the sanctuary was His throne. 
AVell, one of the most conspicuous ornaments of the sanctuary 
was the images of the cherubim, standing upon the ark of the 



THE SENSE OE THE SCRIPTTJKE. 



247 



covenant. And if it be said that these images were not exposed to 
public view, inasmuch as the people were excluded from the sanc- 
tuary ; it may be replied, that they were often brought before 
the minds of the people in those words by which God is so often 
described in the scripture, as lie who sits upon the cherubim ; the 
allusion being here to that special presence of God over the ark 
of the covenant. 

More remarkable still was the image of the brazen serpent, 
which was to be exposed to the view of all the people ; the end 
which it was immediately intended to serve being, the cure of 
all those who having been bitten by the fiery serpents would 
look upon it. That this image was not destitute of a sacred 
character, appears from the fact, that it was a most illustrious 
type of Christ, according to the explanation of the Eedeemer 
Himself, in His discourse with Mcodemus. (John, iii, 14, 15.) 

Having now explained the proof of our assertion, we have 
to answer an argument which our adversaries urge against us, 
taken from the authority of the Jews. The Jewish rabbins 
divide the commandments as the Protestants divide them : doing 
so, they say that this passage under discussion contains two of 
the commandments ; and for this division they can quote J ose- 
phus and Philo. Our answer to this is, that the authority of 
those Jewish rabbins who taught about the period of our Ee- 
deemer' s ministry on earth, is of no weight on this matter of the 
division of the commandments. The reason of this is, that those 
doctors altogether mistook the meaning of the words, thou shalt 
not covet ; and, therefore, it is not surprising that they should 
have failed to mark the proper distinction between the precepts 
directed against coveting. So far were they from understanding 
rightly the force of the words, thou shalt not covet, that they did 
not look upon acts that were merely internal as at all sinful. 
This appears from the sermon of our Eedeemer on the mount, 
wherein He so explains some of the commandments as to show 
us that the justice of the Scribes and Pharisees made no account 
of the mere internal act. (See Matt., v, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28.) 
And Josephus leaves no room for doubting of his sentiments upon 
this point. For he censures Polybius for saying, that " Antio- 
chus Epiphanes died because he had a purpose to plunder the 
temple of Diana in Persia." The reason which he gives for 
censuring Polybius is, "that the purposing to do a thing, but 
not actually doing it, is not worthy of punishment."— Antiq. 
xii, 9. In these prohibitions, then, of the decalogue, these doc- 
tors must have understood the word covet to imply external acts 
of some sort, preparatory to the consummation of crime. They 
misunderstood entirely the meaning of covet, and, therefore, as I 



248 



OP THE MAXKEB OP SETTING EOKTH, ETC. 



said before, it is not wonderful that they should have failed to 
perceive the distinction of the precepts by which it is prohibited 
to covet. 

Some Catholics, also, have marked the division of the com- 
mandments in the same way as the Protestants have done ; thus 
making two precepts of the passage in question. Eut these 
Catholic theologians to whom we refer, (and they are, compara- 
tively, very few in number,) give to the second commandment 
a meaning very different from that which Protestants assign to 
it. Let us take, for example, Frassen, who divides the com- 
mandments in this way : he thus states the meaning of the two 
first commandments'; First, One only God is to he worshipped. 
Second, All idolatry is to he avoided, and all honouring of false 
gods. — DisqwktiomB in Pentateuchnn — in caput xx, Exodi. We 
may well say that Prassen here makes a distinction without 
showing a difference. At all events, such a view of the question 
as this can have no influence upon the controversy between Catho- 
lics and Protestants respecting the division of the commandments. 

There is another view of this subject to which we must refer, 
as it is not destitute of Catholic support : it is this ; that the 
first commandment of the decalogue partly belongs to the natural 
law, and partly to the positive Jewish law; and that, as a 
positive law, it forbade the Jews, on account of their special 
proneness to idolatry, to make even sacred images. Thus, 
Yasquez ; who says that God dispensed in this, positive law, 
when He commanded Moses to make the brazen serpent. Eut 
this opinion, as it appears from what we have already said, has 
no solid foundation in the text of scripture. However, it is un- 
necessary to dwell upon it ; inasmuch as those laws, which were 
merely Jewish, have nothing to do with Christians. The Ju- 
daizing heresy which taught the contrary has been always 
reprobated in the church. And here we can finally, and in con- 
firmation of all that has been said, appeal to that dogmatical law, 
of interpretation, the judgment of the church; which has ever 
clearly declared, that there is no natural law, or positive law 
imposed on Christians, prohibiting to make or to pay due venera- 
tion to sacred images. We find this declaration of the church 
implicitly recorded in her practice at all times : we find it ex- 
plicitly recorded in her condemnation of the iconoclast heresy, 
and of the revival of that heresy by the Calvinists. 

To say a word or two now respecting the form in which the 
preceptive part of this passage in Exodus is given in our shorter 
catechisms ; viz. — / am the Lord, thy God ; thou shalt have no 
other Gods hut me. It is quite clear, from what we have said, 
that, as far at least as Christians are concerned, these few words 



OF THE HISTORICAL GROGRAPEF, ETC. 249 

£ive the full meaning of all that is commanded. On the other 
hand, in this brief form it is more easy to commit to memory, 
and to retain there what is commanded. But if any ^>ne wishes 
to read this preceptive passage at full length, he will easily find 
it in our larger catechisms, not to speak of the Douay Bible at all. 

The tenth commandment is also abbreviated in our shorter 
catechisms. In them there is no mention made of the house, or 
the servant, or the ox, &c. ; but, it is simply said, Thou shalt not 
covet thy neighbour's goods. It is wonderful that our adversaries 
never said that the Catholic clergy adopted this brief form for 
the purpose of more effectually keeping away the attention of 
the people from some deep designs of their own against the 
houses and oxen of their neighbours. Such a calumny, no doubt, 
would be very absurd. Yet, it would have just as much foun- 
dation in fact ; it would exhibit as great an amount of common 
sense in the propounder of it ; and as thorough an acquaintance 
with the whole subject of the decalogue ; as the calumny which 
we have been refuting. 



DISSERTATION XIII. 



OF THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE HOLT LAN!) J ANT) OF THE 
PRINCIPAL COUNTRIES ABOUT IT, OF WHICH MENTION IS MADE 
IN THE SCRIPTURE. 

The importance of being well acquainted with biblical archae- 
ology, (that is, with biblical antiquities,) in order to a right 
understanding of the sacred volume, is too obvious to require 
proof. Biblical archaeology is often designated by the name of 
Jewish antiquities, because it almost exclusively appertains to 
the ancient history of the Jewish people. 

Biblical antiquities are divided into political, religious, and 
domestic antiquities. Before entering upon any of these parts 
of the subject, it is desirable to form as accurate a notion as we 
can respecting the geographical position, and the physical cha- 
racter of the land which that people inhabited, of whose anti- 
quities we are about to treat. We refer, of course, to the 
ancient country of the Jews ; but, before speaking of that, we 
shall say a few words of those countries which bordered upon 
the Jewish possessions ; and of which the names often occur 
in the bible. Among these, the most important to be known 
are, Aramcea, or the country of Aram, Assyria, Phoenicia , Media, 



250 



OF THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 



Persia, Susiana, and Elymais, Babylonia and Chaldea, Arabia, 
Egypt. The region designated in the scriptures by the name of 
Aram, or ^Lramcea, was a tract of country of great extent, having 
Phoenicia on the west, Palestine on the south, Arabia Deserta and 
the river Tigris on the east, and the mountain range of Taurus on 
the north. The country appears to have been divided, anciently, 
into three parts, having the names of Aram, Beth Rohob, Aram 
JS T aJiarayim, and simply Aram. Aram Beth-Rohob, according to 
some, designates Assyria. This opinion, although advocated by 
Jahn, is not considered very probable, because, contrary to the 
common opinion, it would extend the limits of Aramaea to the 
country beyond the Tigris. At present it is not known with 
certainty what were the limits of Aram Beth Pohob. Second. 
—Aram JSfaharayim, or Aram of the two rivers, was so called, 
because it lay between the two rivers — the Tigris and the 
Euphrates. This is the country which was called by the Greeks 
Mesopotamia. Third. — Aram, without any qualification, ordi- 
narily designates Western Syria, or Syria properly so called. 
This country, situated between the 33rd and 37th degrees of IS. 
latitude, was bounded upon the north by Mount Taurus, on 
the west by the Mediterranean Sea and Phoenicia, on the east 
by the Euphrates, and on the south by Palestine and the desert 
of Arabia. It comprised many small states, such as the king- 
doms of Damascus, of Maacha, of Tob, of Emath or Hernath, 
and of Gessur. 

Assyria was, at first, but a small province beyond the Tigris. 
Its limits in early times are unknown. Having been gradually 
enriched by the accession of new provinces it at length extended 
as far as Syria and Palestine, and became exceedingly powerful 
and celebrated under the name of the Assyrian empire. Its 
capital, jSTinive, was situated on the eastern bank of the Tigris, 
opposite to the present Mosul. Whilst the Assyrian empire 
flourished ]Nmive was the most considerable city of Asia. We 
learn from the book of Jonas, that in the days of that prophet 
Mnive was exceedingly populous and of vast extent. The last 
verse of the book gives us to understand that there were in the 
city 120,000 children so young as not to be able to distinguish 
between their right hand and their left. It must have occupied 
a vast space of ground, since it is said to have been " a great 
city of three days' journey.' 7 (Jonas, iii, 3.) It is doubted 
whether or not the three days 1 journey lay in a straight line 
through the city. Some suppose that the space of three days 
was required to go through all the chief streets and public places. 
In either case the ground occupied by the city must have been 
very great. But it is not necessary to suppose that it was all 



OF THE HOLT LAND, ETC. 



251 



occupied by streets and houses ; as the large cities of Asia had 
not only gardens but even fields in the midst of them. jSlnive 
has been for ages a heap of ruins. % 

Assyria is in an especial manner entitled to our notice by 
reason of its connexion with the history of the Hebrew people. 
For a long time did its princes continue to harrass^ the two 
kingdoms of Juda and Israel, until at last they took away cap- 
tive the people of the latter kingdom, and repeopled their country 
from the Assyrian dominions. After the reign of Asor-Haddan 
(mentioned 1st Esdras, iv, 2), the Mecles having shaken off the 
yoke, the Assyrian empire began to decline. It continued to 
exist, however, until the defeat of its last monarch, Sardanapalus 
II, by Cyaxares, king of Media, and iNabopolassar, viceroy of 
Babylon, about 620 e.g., when Xinive was taken, and Assyria, 
having been reduced to a province of Media, suddenly disappeared 
from sacred and profane history ; and thus continued a blank 
for a long succession of ages ; so that at length incredulous men 
were found who treated as a fable not only what profane history 
related of the splendour of ancient Assyria, but even what the 
scripture contained respecting the greatness of 2s inive in the days 
of Jonas the prophet, and the vast military resources of the 
Assyrian monarch. Modern discoveries, we may say, have more 
than confirmed what the scripture relates ; as may be seen by 
the specimens of the former grandeur of the country of which we 
speak, that have been forwarded to Paris and London by the two 
distinguished explorers of the ancient jSTinive, Botta and Layard. 
The ruins which have been hitherto explored are truly wonder- 
ful : palaces of vast dimensions, with gigantic ornaments in the 
shape of winged bulls and lions ; bearing on their sculptured 
walls the records of battles, sieges, triumphs, the bringing of 
tribute by various conquered peoples ; as well as the record of 
feasts and amusements. These discoveries also prove to a 
demonstration that at that early period so many ages before the 
Christian era the arts of life were better known and more skil- 
fully cultivated than they are at this day in those countries. 
These discoveries, therefore, illustrate several allusions to the 
arts and usages of life found in the scripture, upon which they 
throw even a greater light than do the researches amidst the 
monuments of Egypt. And, indeed, this was to be expected, 
considering the relation in which Assyria stood towards Pales- 
tine, as it is recorded in the sacred volume. Moreover, the 
written records of the Assyrian monarchy, which are so abun- 
dant on the walls of the palaces at Khorsabacl and Mmroud, and 
wherever else excavations have been made round about the site 
of the ancient Ninive, promise to throw a still greater light on 



2#2 OP THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 

these ancient times and their usages ; as soon as a satisfactory 
progress shall have been made in deciphering the cuneiform and 
arrow-headed characters of these Assyrian inscriptions. It is 
gratifying to know that the attempts which have been already 
made to decipher these characters — in which attempts Major 
Pawlinson, an Englishman, is principally distinguished — are of 
such a kind as to inspire the greatest hopes of ultimate success 
in this highly interesting inquiry. 

Phcenicia is the name of a province of Syria which extended 
from the Gulf of Issus, where it bounded Cilicia on the north, 
along the coast southwards, to the termination of the ridges of 
Libanus and Antilibanus near Tyre, where it met the border of 
Palestine. In breadth it only comprehended the narrow tract 
between the continuation of Mount Libanus and the sea. Its 
principal cities were Sidon and Tyre, which are frequently men- 
tioned in the scriptures, although the name of Phcenicia does not 
occur there. Sidon was a city of great importance in the time 
of J osue, who refers to it by the name of the great city ( Josue, 
xi, 8, xix, 28). Tyre, more recent than Sidon, became more 
celebrated. Having been destroyed by JSabuchodonosor, it was 
rebuilt upon a site adjacent to that of the ancient city. It was 
afterwards overturned by Alexander the Great, and from that 
time although again restored it never recovered its former great- 
ness. 

Media was a country which extended from the 32nd to the 
40th degree of north latitude, bounded on the west by Assyria 
and Armenia, on the north by the Caspian Sea, on the east by 
Hyreania and Parthia, and on the south by Persia. Its metro- 
polis was Ecbatana, now called Hamdan. 

Persia is that tract which extends from Media on the north, 
as far as the Persian Gulf to the south. In its extended sense, 
it comprehended Elymais and Susiana. In a more restricted 
sense, however, it excluded both these, and had Susiana to the 
west, and Caramania to the east. 

Susiana, of which the metropolis was Susan, was situated 
between Persia and Babylonia, having to the south the Persian 
Gulf. It is now called Chuzistan, or Khomistan. 

Elymais, so called from Elam, the son of Sem, was formerly 
taken to designate all Persia ; although rigorously speaking, it 
was but a province of that empire, situated to the north of 
Susiana, and to the north-east of Babylon ; having on another 
side Media. Its limits cannot be accurately denned. 

Babylonia, so called from its capital city Babylon, so cele- 
brated in history, is the country of which Moses speaks by its 
ancient name of Sennaar (Genesis x, 10). Ptolemy assigns its 



OF THE HOLT LAKD, ETC. 



253 



limits : to the north, Mesopotamia ; to the east, the Tigris, after 
its junction with the Euphrates ; to the west Arabia Deserta ; 
and to the south, a part of the Persian Gulf, and the extremity 
of Arabia Deserta. Chaldea, which, strictly speaking, was but 
a part of. Eabylonia, has sometimes been used to signify the 
entire of the country ; for, in Jeremias, as in all the writings of 
his time, when there is question of the Chaldeans, we must 
understand the inhabitants of the country round about Eabylon. 
It is in the same sense that Ezechiel places Eabylon in Chaldea 
(Ezechiel, xii, 13). What the precise limits of Chaldea, strictly 
taken, were, is a matter of dispute. According to Eosenmuller, 
in his Eiblical Geography of Central Asia {chapter eighth), Chaldea 
was the south-western part of Eabylonia, lying towards Arabia 
Deserta. 

Arabia is an extensive country of Asia, situated to the west of 
the Tigris and the Euphrates, and to the east and south of Pales- 
tine. Ey the inhabitants of Palestine it was called the eastern 
country, but by the Babylonians the western country. Hence, even 
in the scripture its inhabitants are sometimes designated as the 
people of the east ; sometimes as the people of the west. (Com- 
pare Judges, vi, 3 ; 1 Kings, iv, 30 ; Isaiah xi, 14 ;|Jer. xlix, 38 ; 
2 Para, xvii, 11 ; and xxi, 16.) The division of this country by 
Ptolemy and others into Arabia Felix, Petrea, and Deserta, is not 
observed in the bible, nor is it known to the Arabians themselves. 

Arabia Felix, so called on aeoount of its fertility, was called 
also Sabea, and Saba or Seba, whence its inhabitants have been 
designated by the name of Sabeans : it was bounded on the east by 
the Persian Gulf ; on the south by the Indian Oean ; on the 
west by the Jled Sea ; and on the north by the mountains which 
separated it from the two other parts of Arabia. 

Arabia Petrea, so called from its capital city Petra, lay 
along the Red Sea ; being bounded on the north by Palestine ; 
and on the east and south by Arabia Deserta, and a part of 
Arabia Felix. 

Arabia Deserta, according to the ancient geography, was 
bounded on the west by Trachonitis ; on the north by the country 
of Damascus, Syria, and Mesopotamia; and on the south by 
Eabylonia, and by the mountains which separated it from Arabia 
Pelix. Arabia Deserta was the ancient abode of the Edomites, 
the Moabites,!,the Midianites, the Amalekites, and, in fine, of the 
Israelites lor forty years after their departure from Egypt : its 
capital was Eosra, called also Eostram, or Eostra. 

Egypt is a well-known country of Africa, which, in the 
ancient geography, might have been about five hundred miles in 
length ; but its breadth was not considerable. On the east it 



254 



OF THE HISTOKICAL GEOGRAPHY 



was bounded by Arabia Petrea and the Eed Sea ; on the south 
by Ethiopia, or rather Nubia ; on the west by the deserts of 
Lybia ; and on the * north by the Mediterranean Sea. It was 
divided into two, and sometimes into three parts, viz., northern, 
or the lower Egypt, which is called the Delta ; and southern, or 
the upper Egypt, called by the Arabians Zaid, and by the Greeks 
Thebais. The lower part of the upper Egypt was sometimes 
reckoned a third part, and called Heptimomis, because it con- 
sisted of seven districts. The celebrated river Nile, which in 
the scripture is usually designated by the name of Yeor (the 
river), divides the country into two parts. Each year, in the 
months of August and September, it overflows its banks, and by 
the deposit which it leaves fertilizes the country round about. 
The Nile empties itself into the Mediterranean by two mouths : 
these alone, of the seven which it formerly had, now remain. The 
more remarkable cities of Egypt were — Thebes, or the Great Dios- 
polis, the metropolis of Upper Egypt, celebrated by Homer for its 
hundred gates, and still famous by its ruins ; Memphis, near the 
confines of the lower and upper Egypt, on the western shore of 
the Nile; Tarn's, now called Memaleh ; it was the seat of the 
kings of the twenty-first and twenty-third dynasties of Manetho, 
and according to some, the birth-place of Moses. It was from 
this city that one of the principal branches of the Nile took the 
name of Tanitic. Alexandria : this city is situated on a tongue 
of land formed by the Mediterranean Sea and the Lake Moeris. 
This superb city was built by Alexander the Great, who named 
it after himself : it was the residence of the Ptolemys, and the 
capital of Egypt during the period of the Roman domination. It 
acquired great renown for its beautiful port, and still more for 
its library and museum. The ruins which yet remain of the 
ancient city may give us some idea of what it formerly was. 

The land of Gessen, which the Israelites inhabited in Egypt 
was a fertile country, well adapted for pasturage. Interpreters 
and geographers are much divided as to the true situation of this 
country. Glaire adopts as most probable the opinion which 
places it in Lower Egypt, to the east of the Pelusiac branch of 
the Nile, between Heliopolis and Heroopolis. — Glaire Introduc, 
torn, ii, page 16. 

One of the limits of the land of Gessen was the Torrent of 
Egypt which is often mentioned in the scripture. Some inter- 
preters have thought that this Torrent of Egypt referred to the 
Nile. Jahn has brought together several very probable reasons 
to show that it ran near the place formerly called Ehincorura, 
now El-arisch. 

Although it does not fall within our scope precisely to dwell 



OP THE HOLT LAND, ETC. 



255 



upon the history of countries which lay outside the limits of the 
Holy Land, yet there are special reasons why we should not pass 
over Egypt with this mere geographical notice of its boundaries 
and extent. It cannot be denied that before the time when 
Jacob and his family went down to Egypt, by the invitation of 
Pharao, the Egyptians were acquainted with agriculture, and 
all those arts of civilization and government which indicate 
a social existence extending backwards for a considerable time. 
This appears from the several statements in the books of Moses, 
which are confirmed in a striking manner by architectural 
remains that have survived the ravages of above thirty centuries. 
Eor, while the Israelites, under the immediate successors of Josue, 
were still warring with the Chanaanites for the possession of the 
land of promise ; or yet earlier, while they were yet slaves in 
Egypt ; that most interesting land was distinguished for palaces, 
temples, porticoes, obelisks, statues, and canals, which declare 
that they had been preceded by a considerable period of civiliza- 
tion, and which still remain the admiration of the world. The 
Israelites, therefore, during the four hundred and thirty years 
they remained in Egypt, must have learned much from a people 
so far advanced in the arts of civilised life. Moses, in particular, 
having been brought up at court, had thus an excellent oppor- 
tunity of making himself acquainted with the learning of the 
Egyptians, and with the advanced state of arts and sciences 
among them. And, indeed, St. Stephen, in the Acts of the 
Apostles, (vii, 22), informs us that he (Moses) " was instructed 
in all the wisdom of the Egyptians ; and that he was mighty in 
his words and in his deeds." The inspired volume — particularly 
the writings of Moses — is not only the best authority which we 
possess on the early history of Egypt ; but after all the labour 
that has been bestowed on the attempt to decypher the hiero- 
glyphics, it still continues to be also the fullest authority on the 
subject. The interesting view of ancient Egypt which so many 
references in the scripture give us, and which- is so strikingly 
confirmed by many monuments, has induced men of profound 
learning and great powers of mind to engage with extraordinary 
ardour and perseverance in the attempt to decypher the hiero- 
glyphics. It is considered still, even after all that has been 
made known by the highly interesting works Of Young, Cham- 
pollion, and many others, that the success has been by no means 
commensurate with the Labour that has been expended upon this 
object : and that the progress made in reading the hieroglyphics, 
or the amount of knowledge as yet acquired by means of them, 
is not at all as great as the public was led to expect. Whatever 
knowledge, however, has been acquired as to the state of ancient 



256 



Or THE HISTOKICAL GEOGRAPHY 



Egypt by any channel distinct from the sacred writings, has 
been found to harmonise fully with those inspired records ; as 
Christians knew a priori should be the case. And if the revela- 
tions which have been up to the present time drawn from the 
hieroglyphics are comparatively meagre, there is yet another 
class of monuments that supplies us with most abundant and 
important disclosures respecting the ancient history of the 
Egyptians. These are the paintings and sculptures with 
which that people left the walls of their tombs and temples 
decorated, in forms aod colours which have not yet faded from 
the sight. The author of the article on Egypt, in Kitto's Cyclo- 
paedia of Biblical Literature, observes : 1 1 Let any one visit the 
Egyptian Gallery in the British Museum, and he will be surprised 
and delighted to find Egypt almost resuscitated. The tombs 
have given up their dead. Buried treasures, over whose silence 
centuries had rolled before our era began, crowd on the sight 
and gratify the mind. And paintings, too, strike the eye, which 
may not, indeed,- conform very exactly to the laws of perspec- 
tive, but which lay open and set before the spectator the 
Egyptian, as he was in the days of his glory and pride. Indeed, 
from the paintings and sculptures which have been discovered 
and described, we are enabled to follow this most singular and 
deeply interesting people through all the classes of society, 
through all the operations of science and husbandry, into the 
transactions of public life, the details of housekeeping, the 
achievements of war, the amusements of hunting, fishing, 
feasting, and the solemn rites of a most imposing religious 
ceremonial." — Kitto's Oyclopcedia, vol. i, p. 603. 

Some, whose object it was to depreciate the religious institu- 
tions of Moses, have said that the Hebrew legislator was, in this 
matter, a mere copyist of the Egyptian ritual as it then existed. 
Others, although not influenced by so unworthy a motive, have 
advanced opinions which would give too great a sanction to this 
assertion. Thus Hengstenberg, in his work, Egypt and the 
Boohs of Moses, whilst he demonstrates from the monuments of 
Egypt the falsehood of the opinion which would assign a later 
date to these books than the age of Moses, is justly blamed 
for the tendency which he shows to throw doubts on the 
originality of the Mosaic legislation. And long before the time 
cf HeEgstenberg, Spencer, in his well-known work, Be Begibus 
Melrceorum Ritualibus et eorum Bationibus, has taught that 
almost all the Mosaic religious rites were borrowed from the 
Gentile— particularly from the Egyptian ritual. But these 
opinions are by no means admissible. The two Protestant 
authors here mentioned do not deny the divinity of the Jewish 



OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. 



257 



religion ; then it onght to be a sufficient answer to them to say 
that Moses, the inspired legislator of the Jews, could only 
deliver that law to this people which God commissioned him to 
deliver. Kow it cannot be supposed that God, in His wisdom, 
would use the profane ceremonies of the Gentiles to fore- 
shadow His future church ; or, that for the pure worship of 
Himself, the true God, He would prescribe a ritual associated in 
the minds of the people with a debasing idolatrous worship. 
Besides, Moses speaks in such a manner of his law, and ordinan- 
ces of worship, as is quite irreconcilable with the opinion which 
we are here combating ; he says, in Deuteronomy (iv, 6-8) — 
" Eor this is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of 
nations, that hearing all these precepts they may say : behold a 

wise and understanding people, a great nation For what 

other nation is there so renowned, that hath ceremonies and just 
judgments, and all the law, which I will set forth this day before 
your eyes ?" jSow, if the Jewish ceremonial had been a copy of 
the Egyptian, how could Moses have made such a statement as 
this in the presence of the people, who would have at once said 
that it could not possibly be a matter of astonishment to the 
Egyptians to hear of rites with which they were already so 
familiar in their own worship ? Moreover, it is the repeated 
injunction of Moses to the Hebrews — Not to do to the Lord their 
God as the nations of Chanaan did to their Gods : thus he speaks 
in Deuter, (xii, 4,) and in other places. And doubtless whilst 
Moses thus expressed his abhorrence of the idolatrous rites of 
the Chanaanite worship, he would not at the same time have 
honoured Egyptian idolatry so far as to have incorporated its 
ritual with his own law. If it be said that the ceremonies of 
Chanaanite idolatry were specially revolting, we can say on the 
other hand that the brute- worship of Egypt gave a special 
character of degradation to the rites of that country. In fact, 
since the time when Hengstenberg wrote his book on Egypt and 
the Boohs of Moses, the alleged basis of his doubts has been re- 
moved by more recent researches among the monumental records 
of that country : and the answer which had been given long 
since to the objection, taken from the similarity between certain 
Mosaic and Egyptian rites, has been strikingly confirmed. The 
true state of the case then is : — First, That the code of 
Jewish law was derived from no previously existing institutions. 
Secondly, That the Mosaic institutions, in all their great and 
prominent and substantial features were different from, and 
opposed to, the peculiar institutions of the Gentile nations. We 
say peculiar, because some things, such as the offering of sacrifice, 
we hold to have come down from the primitive tradition — from 



258 



OF THE HISTOEICAL GEO GRAPH r 



the instructions given by the first parents of the human race to 
their children, as to how God was to be worshipped, the vestiges, 
of which instructions were not entirely obliterated, even among 
the Pagans. Thirdly, Where an agreement in some minor mat- 
ters is discovered between the Mosaic and Egyptian rites or 
observances, this may be accounted for by supposing that the 
Egyptians borrowed the rites in question from the Mosaic insti- 
tutions : or, if one should insist that the rite first existed 
among the Egyptians, then it may be said that there was some 
natural fitness in the thing, on account of which it was pre- 
scribed by God, without any reference to its previous adoption 
by any other people. On this head the learned Hooke supplies 
another answer — that is, that admitting that all the rites that 
were common to Egyptians and Hebrews were derived from the 
former people, such admission would by no means detract from 
the divine authority of the law : for, after it had been made 
known to the people by signs and wonders that the Mosaic 
religion proceeded from God ; after innumerable laws had been 
sanctioned, altogether opposed to the superstitions of Egypt, and 
which would make an everlasting separation between the two 
peoples ; it was not by any means inconsistent with wisdom to 
preserve those rites and usages which were already known to 
the people, and which could be easily converted to a good end. 
(See Hooke Be Vera Religione — Editio cursus completi. Tom. ii, 
col. 789.) 

We shall here observe in conclusion that when we pass from 
the Mosaic legislation to investigate the ancient state of the arts 
and sciences among the Hebrews, and of their domestic antiquities 
generally; we find that in that department their residence in 
Egypt for so long a period exercised a direct and most important 
influence. 

We come now to treat immediately of the Historical Geo- 
graphy of the Holy Land — and we cannot better preface our 
remarks upon the subject than by quoting the words of St. 
Jerome, (Mpistola ad Bomnionem et Hoyatian,) adduced by Jahn 
and Glaire, in which this holy father beautifully points out the 
utility of this study for the interpreter of the scripture, 1 i Quo- 
modo Grascorum historias magis intelligunt qui Athenas viderint, 
et tertium Yirgilii librum, qui a Troade per Leucatem et Acro- 
ceraunia ad Siciliam, et uncle ad ostia Tiberia navigaverint ; ita 
sanctam Scripturam lucidius intuebitur qui Judaeam oculis con- 
templatus sit, et antiquarum urbium memorias, locorumque vel 
eaclem vocabula, vel niutata cognoverit. Unde et nobis curae fuit 
cum eruditissimis viris hunc laborem subire ; ut circumiremus 
provinciam, quam universae Ecclesise Christi sonant. " 



OP THE HOLY LAST), ETC. 



259 



The country of the Hebrews has been designated by several 
names: thus it has been called, first, The Land of Chanaan, 
because after the deluge it was inhabited by the descendants of 
Chanaan, the son of Cham, or the Chanaanites. The sons of 
Chanaan, who divided this country among them, and were for a 
longtime by their descendants masters of it, were — Sidon, Heth, 
Jehus, Amorrh, Gerges, Heve, Arac, Sin, Arad, Samar, and 
Hamath. (Gen. x, 15-19.) Second, The Land of Promise, or the 
Promised Land, because God had promised it to the descendants 
of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Third, The Land 
of the Hebrews or Lsraelites, after Josue had divided it among the 
twelve tribes of Israel. Fourth, The Kingdoms of Juda and of 
Lsrael y on account of the two kingdoms which were formed at the 
time of the schims under Roboam, the son of Solomon, of which 
one was called the kingdom of Juda, composed of the two tribes 
of Juda and Benjamin, and the other the kingdom of Israel, 
which comprised the other ten tribes. Fifth, Judea, because 
after the return of the Hebrews from the Babylonian captivity, 
the greater part of those who again took possession of their 
ancient country belonged to the tribe of Juda. Sixth, Palestine, 
a name given to it by the Greeks and Romans, and derived from 
the name of one of those peoples who anciently inhabited the 
country, viz., the Palestinians, called by us in imitation of their 
Hebrew name, Philistines. Seventh, in fine, The Holy Land, in 
memory of the Nativity, Life, Passion, and Death of our 
Eedeemer ; and of all the Divine prodigies whereof it has been 
the theatre. This name, which has been given to it by the 
Christians, is the one which is most appropriately employed when 
we speak of this country. 

As regards the limits of the Holy Land, Jahn (Archceologia 
Biblica) observes, " Chanaan, the country promised by God to 
Abraham and his posterity, and which was at first occupied in 
part by the Chanaaneans, and in part by Abraham, Isaac, and 
Jacob, had for its boundaries round about the river Jordan, and the 
Dead Sea, Arabia-Petrea, the Mediterranean Sea, and Syria : 
but the promises of God, at the same time, regarded those 
countries which the Hebrews in after times, when provoked to 
arms, should subject to their own dominion. Hence, in the 
very outset, that they might be able to penetrate into the country 
which the patriarchs had occupied, they encountered the kings 
of that tract of country beyond the Jordan, which extended from 
the river Arnon to the foot of Mount Hermon, or Antilibanus ; 
and having overcome these kings, they took possession of their 
lands (see 21st chapter of Numbers) ; and in after ages they 
reduced other countries under their sway." Hence, as the 



260 



0*F THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 



country of the Hebrews was at some times more extensive than 
at others, we need not be astonished that the scripture does not 
always define the limits of this country in the same way. How- 
ever, according to the more ordinary acceptation of the Holy 
Land, we may with Glaire fix its boundaries as follows: — on 
the north Phoenicia and Mount Libanus, which separated it 
from Syria ; on the east the mountains of Galaad and of Arabia ; 
on the south Mount Seir ; and on the west the Mediterranean 
Sea. The exact extent of this country has been variously esti- 
mated by geographers ; according to the most accurate maps, it 
appears to have been nearly two hundred miles in length, and in 
breadth to have varied from eighty to near a hundred miles. 

Before the arrival of the twelve tribes in the promised land, 
it was occupied by the descendants of Chanaan, the son of Cham. 
Before Abraham entered the country it was inhabited by eleven 
nations, whose names were taken from the eleven sons of 
Chanaan. These were, first— the Sidonians ; second, the Hethites ; 
third, the Jebusites ; fourth, the Amorrhites ; fifth, the Gerges- 
ites ; sixth, the Hevites ; seventh, the Aracites ; eighth, the 
Sinites ; ninth, the Aradians ; tenth, the Samarites ; and eleventh, 
the Hamathites. These had the country and its several cities 
portioned out among them. When, however, God promised the 
land to Abraham, as related in the fifteenth chapter of Genesis, 
we find that the possessors of the country were somewhat differ- 
ently named, and formed but ten nations, viz : — the Cineans, 
Cenezites, Cedmonites, Hethites, Pharizites, Eaphaim, Amorrh- 
ites, Chanaanites, Gergesites, and Jebusites (Gen. xv, 19-21). 
In the days of Moses we find the country in the hands of seven 
nations, viz : — first, the Hethites ; second, the Gergesites ; third, 
the Amorrhites ; fourth, the Chanaanites ; fifth, the Pherezites ; 
sixth, the Hevites ; and seventh, the Jebusites. These were the 
seven nations with which the children of Israel were to make no 
league, but which they were utterly to destroy. (Deut. vii, 
1-2; see also Josue, iii, 10, and xxiv, 11.) The Hethites, the 
Pherezites, the Jebusites, and the Amorrhites dwelt in the 
mountains or hill country of Judea, southward : the Chanaanites 
dwelt in the midland ; by the sea, westward ; and by the coast 
of Jordan, eastward : the Gergesites, along the eastern side of 
the sea of Galilee : and the Hevites in Mount Libanus, under 
Hermon, northward. Of all these nations, the Amorrhites 
became the most powerful ; so as to extend their conquests over 
a considerable tract beyond the river Jordan : whence they are 
sometimes put for the whole seven nations, as in Genesis, xv, 16. 
In compliance with the command of God to exterminate these 
people, we find that within the period of seven years, Moses 



OF THE HOLT LAND, ETC. 



261 



conquered two powerful kingdoms on the east ; and Josue thirty- 
one smaller kingdoms on the west of the J ordan ; and gave their 
land to the Israelites : though it appears that some of the old 
inhabitants were permitted by God to remain, to prove the fidelity 
of the Israelites to the Divine commands ; and for their infidelity 
to these commands, the nations thus spared were afterwards per- 
mitted to oppress them with great severity : nor were they 
finally subdued until the reigns of David and Solomon, who 
reduced them to 'the condition of slaves. (2 Kings, v, 6-8 ; 3 
Kings, ix, 20.) Solomon employed 153,600 of them in the most 
servile parts of his work, in the building of the temple, and of 
his palace, &c. 

Besides these devoted nations there were others either settled 
in the land at the arrival of the Israelites or in its immediate envi- 
rons, with whom the latter had to maintain many severe con- 
flicts : they were six in number. 

First. — The Philistines, whose territory lay along the sea 
shore, in the south-west of Chanaan. They had seized this 
country from the Hevites, who possessed it previously. The 
Philistines were descended from Mizraini the father of the 
Egyptians : their name is not Hebrew, and hence the Sep- 
tuagint styles them aAXopuXo/, i.e. alienigence, foreigners : they 
had frequent wars with the Jews, and became so considerable a 
nation that the Greeks called the whole land of Chanaan, after 
their name, Palestine TluXaiGmr}. It was only by Judas Macha- 
baeus that they were completely subdued ; and brought under the 
dominion of the Jews. 

Second. — The Madianites were the descendants of Madian, 
the fourth son of Abraham, by Cethura. These are the people 
who sent their daughters to solicit the Israelites to sin, and to 
worship the idol Phogor ; at the same time that the Israelites 
committed sin with the daughters of Moab and worshipped their 
idol Beelphegor ; as related in the 25th chapter of Numbers. 
They oppressed the Israelites exceedingly in the time of the 
judges until Gedeon succeeded in shaking off their yoke. Their 
country lay to the east of the Dead Sea, and to the south of 
Moab. We find also in the scripture that Madianites dwelt to 
the east of the Peel Sea, near Mount Sinai. Here dwelt Jethro, 
the father-in-law of Moses. Some suppose, as Calmet (diction. 
voce Madian), that these were descended from another Madian, 
who was a son of Chus, the eldest son of Cham : and indeed we 
find Sephora, the wife of Moses, called a Chusite. (Numb., xii, 1 
in Heb.) Others think that the Madianites were all descended 
from Abraham ; but that these who dwelt to the east of the Ped 



262 



OF THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 



Sea occupied the country which had been formerly held by the 
Chusites. 

Third. — The Moabites, a people descended from Moab, the 
son of Lot. They dwelt beyond the Jordan and the Dead Sea. 
on each side of the river Arnon. They had taken possession of 
that country after expelling a gigantic race, the Emims. (Deut., 
ii, 11-12). The Moabites in their turn were forced to give up a 
part of the country to the Amorrhites. Moses, as we see by 
Deut., ii. 9, would not be permitted by God to destroy this nation. 
They carried on several wars against Israel in after times. 
They, together with the Ammonites, were conquered by David, 
and made subject to the Israelites. After the separation of the 
ten tribes they fell to the part of the kingdom of Israel. After 
the death of Achab they rebelled and were severely chastized by 
Joram, the son of Achab, king of Israel. The precise state of 
the nation after that time is not well known. 

Fourth. — The Ammonites were a kindred people to the 
Moabites, being descended from Amnion, the other son of Lot. 
Their country lay to the north-east of the Moabites. It had been 
formerly held by a gigantic race called the Zomzommims. (Deut., 
ii, 19-20.) vVe read in this place here quoted that the Israelites 
were forbidden to fight against them or to take their land. 
Before the entrance of the Israelites into the land of Chanaan, 
the Amorrhites had taken a portion of their country from the 
Moabites and Ammonites : this part Moses having recovered 
from the Amorrhites, gave to the tribes of Euben and Gad. In 
the time of Jepthe, the Ammonites made war on the Israelites on 
account of this land ; but Jepthe completely overcame them in 
battle, and preserved these possessions for Israel. We find that 
generally the Moabites and Ammonites were leagued together 
in the harassing wars which they carried on against the Israel- 
ites ; and hence, we have seen above, that David attacked at the 
same time and subdued both these nations. The occasion of this 
was, that David, who had been a friend to the king of the Am- 
monites, sent on hearing of his death to Eanon, his son and suc- 
cessor, ambassadors to condole with him on the death of his father. 
Hanon, supposing that these were spies, treated them igno- 
miniously ; whereupon David, to avenge the honour of his 
ambassadors, made war upon and subdued the Ammonites 
together with their allies of Moab. 

Fifth. — The Amalechites were, according to Calmet, the de- 
scendants of Amalech, the son of Eliphaz, and grandson of Esau, 
mentioned in Genesis, xxxvi, 12. The Amalechites were a 
powerful people that formerly dwelt in Arabia Deserta, between 
the Dead Sea and the Red Sea, or between Hevila and Sur. 



OF THE HOLT LAND, ETC. 



263 



(1 Kings, xv, 7.) These attacked the Israelites in the desert of 
Raphidim, very soon after they had passed over the Red Sea ; and 
they cruelly put to death all those who through labour or fatigue 
had fallen behind on the march (Exodus xvii, 8) : for this they 
were first punished by Josue, who gained a great victory over 
them, whilst Moses held up his hands in prayer on the mount or 
hill near which the battle was fought ; Aaron and Hur sustained 
the arms of Moses. (Exodus, xvii, 12.) The Amalechites were, 
moreover, doomed by God to utter destruction, which was com- 
menced by Saul and finished by David. 

Sixth. — The Edomites or Idumeans were the descendants of 
Esau, who was also called Edom, and was the elder brother of 
Jacob. Idumsea, their country, was a province of Arabia, lying 
southward of Judea, and was originally possessed by the Horites. 
It was principally a mountainous tract including the mountains 
of Seir and Hor. The Edomites were inveterate foes to Israel. 
They were made tributary by David, and for 150 years continued 
subject to the kingdom of Juda : thus was fulfilled the oracle of 
God to Rebecca, that Esau would serve Jacob. (Genesis, xxv, 23.) 
After various attempts they revolted in the reign of Joram, the 
son of Josaphat, (2 Paralip., xxi,) and ultimately succeeded in 
rendering themselves independent. In after times, however, we 
are informed by Josephus that John Hircanus completely sub- 
dued them, and subjected them to circumcision and the other 
legal observances. (Antiq. book xiii, c. 17.) 

We come now to speak of the division of theHoly Land among 
the twelve tribes made by Josue. He succeeded to Moses as chief 
of the people of God ; and he it was who parcelled out to the 
Hebrew tribes their portions of the land of promise. We find 
this distribution minutely detailed in the book of Josue, xiii to 
xix. We consider a minute detail of that distribution not so 
necessary now, seeing the great change that has come over the 
entire face of Palestine since that division was made. We shall 
therefore indicate briefly after Glaire the position of the twelve 
districts assigned to the twelve tribes of Israel. The tribes of 
Israel were then thirteen ; the sons of Joseph, Manasses and 
Ephraim being the heads of distinct tribes ; but the tribe of Levi 
had not a distinct territory assigned to it. The Levites, dispersed 
among the several tribes, inhabited forty-eight cities which were 
given to them. This, then, was the arrangement of the twelve 
districts of the twelve tribes of Israel . — 

Eirst. — The district of the tribe of Ruben was situated beyond 
the Jordan, and formed the southern part of the possessions of 
Israel on that eastern side of the Jordan. 

Second. — The tribe of Gad was placed to the north of that of 



264 



OF THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 



Buben : the Jordan bounded it on the west and the moun- 
tains of Galaad on the east. 

Third. — -The tribe of Manasses was situated, one half beyond 
the Jordan, where it occupied the ancient country of Basan ; the 
other half tribe of Manasses was situated on the inner or western 
side of the Jordan ; the limits of its district are not so accurately 
denned by Josue, but it appears that it occupied the district to 
the north of the tribe of Ephraim ; and that on one side it ex- 
tended to the Mediterranean Sea, but on the other reached not 
as far as the Jordan. 

Fourth. — The tribe of Juda had its territory in the southern 
part of Palestine, along the eastern coast of the Dead Sea ; it was 
bounded on the north by the tribe of Benjamin, and on the south 
by the mountains of Seir, which divided it from Idumea. This 
tribe was the most important of all ; whether we consider the 
extent of its territory, or that from it were descended the kings 
of the people (whence it was called the royal tribe) ; or, in fine, 
that from it was to be born the Bedeemer of the world. 

Fifth. — 'The tribe of Simeon was situated to the south and 
west of Juda ; it had to the north the tribe of Dan, and the Phi- 
listines ; to the west the Mediterranean ; and to the south Arabia 
Petrea. 

Sixth. — The limits of the tribe of Dan have not been pre- 
cisely traced by Josue. Its district lay on the coast of the 
Mediterranean, on the north of Simeon, and on the west of Juda. 
"We find, also, that a colony of Danites fixed its seat in the city 
of Lais, on the northern extremity of the Holy Land. This city 
was afterwards called Dan. 

Seventh. — The tribe of Benjamin was bounded on the north 
by that of Ephraim, and on the south by the tribe of Juda ; it 
had the Jordan on the east ; on the western side it did not ex- 
tend as far as the Mediterranean, the territory of Ephraim lying 
between it and the sea. 

Eighth. — The tribe of Ephraim lay to the south of that half 
tribe of Manasses which was situated on the inner side of the 
Jordan. The territory of Ephraim from east to west extended 
from the Jordan to the Mediterranean, or the Great Sea. 

Ninth.— The tribe of Issachar, situated in the plain of Jez- 
reel, or Esdrelon, had to the south the district belonging to the 
half tribe of Manasses, which was on the eastern side of the 
Jordan ; to the north it had the tribe of Zabulon ; to the east the 
Jordan ; and to the west the Mediterranean. 

Tenth. — The tribe of Aser, placed to the north-west of Pales- 
tine, was bounded on the north by Mount Libanus ; on the south 



OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. 



265 



by the valley of Jephtael ; on the east by the tribe of Nephthali, 
and on the west by the Mediterranean. 

Eleventh. — The tribe of Zabulon had for its limits, to the 
north, the tribes of Aser and of Nephthali ; to the south the tor- 
rent of Cison ; to the east the Sea of Galilee (which was a lake 
formed by the Jordan) ; and to the west the Mediterranean ; 
although it is not quite certain that it extended as far as the sea. 
The way from the Sea of Galilee to the Mediterranean lay through 
Zabulon ; and hence this district is called the way of the sea. 
Isaias, ix, 1 ; Matthew, iv, 15.) 

Twelfth.— The tribe of JSephthali. This district stretched 
along the northern parts of Palestine : it was bounded by the 
tribes of Aser and Zabulon, by the lake of Genesareth (the sea 
of Galilee) and the Jordan. 

After the death of Solomon the country was divided into 
two kingdoms : one, formed by the two tribes of Juda and Ben- 
jamin, was called the kingdom of Juda; its metropolis was Jeru- 
salem, the chief city of the entire land. It comprised the 
territories of these two tribes, together with so much of the 
territories of Dan and Simeon as were intermixed with the pos- 
sessions of Juda. The boundary line of the two kingdoms of 
Juda and Israel was the northern limit of the tribe of Benjamin. 

The kingdom of Israel included all the northern and middle 
parts of the Holy Land occupied by the ten tribes of which the 
kingdom was formed. Its capital was Samaria, in the tribe of 
Ephraini, situated about thirty miles north-east of Jerusalem. 
This division ceased on the subversion of the kingdom of Israel 
by Salmanasar, king of Assyria ; after it had subsisted two 
hundred and fifty-four years. The last king of Israel was Osee. 
The kingdom of Juda continued for one hundred and twenty-seven 
years longer ; until in the reign of its last king, Sedecias, the 
people were Drought captive to Babylon. 

After the return of the people who had formed the kingdom 
of Juda from captivity, they were subject in succession to the 
kings of Persia, Egypt, and Syria ; and it was only under the 
Machabees that they recovered their independence. Afterwards 
the country became a Roman province. It was next given by 
the senate to Herod the Great, with the title of king. After 
his death, his three sons, Archelaus, Herod Antipas, and Philip 
divided the country among them, and governed it, but without 
the kingly title. After them the Romans became again the 
immediate rulers of the country ; which was placed under the 
presidency of a governor from Eome. 

In the time of our Redeemer, the holy land was divided into 
five provinces, viz., Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Persea, and Idumasa. 



1266 OF THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 

I. Judea was bounded on the west by the Mediterranean, on 
the south by Arabia Petrea, on the east by the Dead sea and the 
Jordan, and on the north by Samaria. Jerusalem, the chief city 
of the holy land, was in this province. In extent it was nearly 
equal to the former kingdom of Juda. 

II. Samaria ; this province was so called from the city of 
Samaria, the ancient capital of the kingdom of Israel. It com- 
prised the territories which had formerly belonged to the tribe 
of Ephraim, and to that half tribe of Manasses that lay on the 
western side of the Jordan. Samaria lay exactly in the middle 
between Judea and Galilee, so that any one who wished to go 
directly from Galilee to Jerusalem, should of necessity pass 
through it. (St. John, iv, 4.) 

III. Galilee comprised the northern part of Palestine. It 
was bounded on the north by Phoenicia and Syria ; on the east 
by the Jordan and the lake of Genesareth ; on the south by the 
plain of Esdrelon ; and on the west by the Mediterranean and 
a part of Phoenicia. It was divided into upper and lower, or 
northern and southern Galilee. Upper Galilee was also called 
Galilee of the Gentiles, because it reckoned a great many Gen- 
tiles or Pagans among its inhabitants. In the territory of the 
upper Galilee were situated the twenty cities which Solomon 
gave to Hiram, king of Tyre. (3 Kings, ix, 11.) It was in 
Galilee, in the city of Nazareth, that our Divine Redeemer was 
conceived and brought up ; it was there that He dwelt for the 
greater part of His mortal life ; in Galilee it was that He com- 
menced His public ministry, and performed a great number of 
His miracles. He was called, on this account, the Galilean. 
Sometimes also, the name of Galileans was given to His apostles, 
and to the first Christians. 

IV. Percea ; this province lay beyond, that is, on the eastern 
side of the Jordan. Its name is derived from the Greek word, 
Kspccv beyond. According to the most accurate geographers it 
contained the eight following districts. Percea properly so called, 
Galaad, Gaulonitis, Batliancea, Auranitis or Iturcea, Trachonitis, 
Abilene, and a part of Decapolis. 

1. Percea, properly so called, or in its restricted sense, inclu- 
ded the southern part of the country beyond Jordan ; lying south 
of Ituraea, east of Judea and Samaria : it was anciently pos- 
sessed by the two tribes of Euben and Gad. Within this district 
was the fortress Machserus, memorable as being the place in 
which St. John the Baptist was put to death. 

2. Galaad was situated to the north of the torrent or river 
of Jaboc. It embraced a considerable part of the possessions of 
Israel beyond the Jordan. 



OF THE HOLY LAS"D, ETC. 



267 



3. Gaulonitis was a tract on the east side of the lake of 
Genesareth and the river Jordan. It extended as far as the 
mountains of Hermon. This district is not referred to by name 
in the New Testament. 

4. Bathancea was situated to the north-east of Gaulonitis. 
This district is not noticed in the New Testament. 

5. Auranitis or Iturcea. This district anciently belonged to 
the half tribe of Manasses which settled on the east of the 
Jordan. It was situated to the north of Bathansea, and the east 
of Gaulonitis. It is mentioned by St. Luke, (iii, 1 , ) by its name 
of Ituraea. 

6. Trachonitis was situated to the north of Auranitis, and to 
the east of Csesarea Philippi, the ancient city of Dan. Tracho- 
nitis was famous for its caverns ; which even in the time of 
Herod the Great were still inhabited. We find from the third 
chapter of St. Luke's gospel, first verse, that when the Baptist 
commenced his mission, Philip, the brother of Herod Antipas, 
was tetrarch of Ituraea and this district of Trachonitis. 

7. Abilene was the most northern of these disticts : it was 
situated between the mountains of Libanus and Antilibanus. It 
is supposed to have been within the borders of the tribe of 
Nephthali ; although it was never subdued by the Israelites. 
At the time of the Baptist's mission it had for tetrarch Lysanias. 
(Luke, iii, 1.) 

8. Decapolis. This district, which received its name from ten 
considerable and celebrated cities which it contained, is supposed 
by many eminent geographers to have formed a part of the 
province of Peraea. But, concerning the limits of this district 
and the names of its ten cities, geographers are by no means 
agreed. It would appear, indeed, that all the cities were not 
beyond the Jordan, and, consequently, that the whole district 
was not in Perasa ; because, at least Scythopolis, which was the 
chief city, was on the west of the Jordan. The other cities were, 
according to Pliny : Philadelphia, Kaphana, Gadara, Hippos, 
Dion, Pella, Gerasa, Canatha, and Damascus. Decapolis is 
mentioned in the New Testament. (Matt., iv, 25 ; Mark, v, 20.) 

V. Province of Idumcea ; This province was added by the 
Romans on their conquest of Palestine. It comprised the ex- 
treme southern part of Judea, together with a small part of 
Arabia. It would appear that it was during the Babylonian 
captivity that the Idumeans seized upon this tract which had 
been left uninhabited. These Idumeans afterwards were subju- 
gated by the Machabees, and, in the end, embraced Judaism. 
Yet, this tract of country in the time of Christ, and for a conside- 
rable period afterwards, continued to retain the name of Idumsea. 



268 



OF THE HISTORICAL GrEOGrKArilY 



The most remarkable towns in these provinces, at the time of 
our Redeemer's coming, were the following: in Judea, besides, 
the great city of Jerusalem, Arimathea, Azotus, Bethania, 
Bethlehem, Bethphage, Emmaus, Ephraim, Gaza, Jericho, Joppe, 
Lydda, and Rama. In Samaria, the city of Samaria, Sichem, 
and Antipatris. In Upper Galilee, CaBsarea Philippi. In Lower 
Galilee, Tiberias, Corozain, Bethsaida, Nazareth, Cana, Caphar- 
naum, Nairn, Cesarea of Palestine, and Ptolemais. The other 
remarkable towns of the Holy Land have been already mentioned 
under the head of Decapolis. 

1. Jerusalem, called at a former period Jehus, (Jos., xviii, 28,) 
and Salem, (Hebr., vii, 1,) signifies the vision of peace. This city 
at the first division of the Holy Land fell to the lot of Benjamin. 
(Jos., xviii, 28.) After the capture of the city by Josue, (Jos., 
x,) the Jebusites, its former inhabitants, were not expelled ; but 
it was jointly inhabited by Hebrews and Jebusites for about five 
hundred years, until the time of David, who, having expelled the 
Jebusites, made it his residence. This city appears sometimes 
to be reckoned in the scripture among the possessions of the 
tribe of Juda. It was on the confines of the two tribes of Juda 
and Benjamin, and is at one time attributed to one tribe, and 
again to the other. As Calmet observes, by the right of the 
primitive distribution, under Josue, it belonged rather to the 
tribe of Benjamin ; but by the right of conquest Juda had 
stronger claim to it, having twice taken it from the enemy ; first, 
under the Judges, although at that time the Jebusites were not 
expelled, as has been already observed ; and secondly, under 
David. However, after God had chosen this city to be the seat 
of His temple, it became the metropolis of the whole kingdom, 
and afterwards did not belong, properly, either to Juda or Ben- 
jamin, but was the common property of all the Hebrew people. 
The city of Jerusalem stood upon two hills, surrounded by a 
chain of mountains. In the time of our Redeemer it had be- 
come a vast city. When David took it from the Jebusites, it 
merely comprised within its limits the mountain which lay to 
the south of the mount, on which the temple was afterwards 
built ; that is, to the south of Mount Sion. On this Mount of 
Sion David built a new city, called by his name the City of 
David. In this City of David was built the royal palace; and 
upon Mount Moria, a part of the same Mount of Sion, the temple 
of the Lord was erected. Between these two mountains, i.e., 
the mount on which stood the ancient city of Jebus, and the 
Mount of Sion, on which stood the city of David, there lay the 
valley of Mello, which, having been filled up with earth, under 
David and Solomon, united together the two cities. After the 



OF THE HOLT LAND, ETC. 



269 



reign of Manasses we find a second part of the city mentioned, 
(2 Paralip. ? xxxiv, 22,) which is supposed by Calmet to have 
been a considerable addition to the former city. Afterwards, 
Josephus informs us that the Machabees, having made some 
additions, extended the city, principally on the side of the north, 
so that it took in a third hill. According to the same authority, 
a fourth hill, called Eezeta, was added by Agrippa, so that the 
city had never been more extensive than it was when besieged 
by the Romans. It was also exceedingly strong for that time, 
being surrounded with three walls. Those three walls, more- 
over, were provided at certain distances, and in the most exposed 
places, with quadrangular towers, forty feet in breadth and 
height, which served for their better protection, and among these 
the tower of Antonia, on the outermost wall, resembled a regu- 
lar fortress, and being a hundred and forty feet high, had an 
extensive view. On the first wall there were sixty, on the second 
fourteen, and on the third ninety towers. Following the course of 
the external wall, the whole circuit of the city was about eight 
miles. The ordinary number of its inhabitants was from a 
hundred and twenty to a hundred and fifty thousand men, but 
at the time of the great feast it amounted to much more than a 
million, owing to the prodigious influx of Jews from all countries, 
and this explains how so many Jews perished at the destruction 
of this city by Titus. Those who at the time of the festivals 
could not find accommodation in the city itself encamped in tents 
in the vicinity. During the time of Christ, Jerusalem was 
adorned with numerous edifices, both sacred and civil, but its 
chief glory was the temple, which shall be described afterwards. 

2. Arimathea, a city of Judea, remarkable as having been 
the city of Joseph, who took care of the burial of Christ. (See 
St. Luke, xxiii, 50-51.) According to St. Jerome (in Epitaph. 
Paullat) it was situated between Lydda and Joppe. It is now 
called Eamla. 

3. Azotus ; this town, in the division under Josue, had been 
assigned to the tribe of Juda. It was, however, detained a long 
time by the Philistines, and among the five principalities of the 
Philistines it was considered the most powerful. It lay between 
Ascalon and Accaron. It is mentioned in the New Testament 
as the place in which Philip the deacon was found, after bap- 
tising the Ethiopian eunuch. (Acts viii, 40.) It is at present an 
inconsiderable place. In its vicinity are numerous relics of 
antiquity. 

4. Bethania was a town situated at the foot of Mount Olivet, 
to the east of Jerusalem, on the way leading from Jericho to 
Jerusalem. Here dwelt Martha and Mary, and their br6ther 



270 



OF THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 



Lazarus, whom Jesus restored to life. Here also Hary anointed 
our Redeemer's head with precious ointment. Bethania was 
only fifteen furlongs distant from Jerusalem. It is now a 
miserable village. 

5. Bethlehem, a town of the tribe of Juda. Its name signifies 
the house of bread. It was commonly called Bethlehem of Juda, 
to distinguish it from another town of the same name in the 
tribe of Zabulon. It was also called Ephrata, and its inhabi- 
tants Ephrateans. It was not remarkable for greatness and 
riches. However, it was a place of note among the Jews, 
as the seat of the family of David, and the birth-place of David 
himself. (Ruth, ii, 1-4; iv, 14-17; 1st Kings, xvi, 1; xvii, 
12, 15.) But it has acquired the greatest celebrity in conse- 
quence of being the birth-place of our Redeemer. Bethlehem 
is about six miles south-west from Jerusalem. It is said to con- 
tain at present between a thousand and fifteen hundred inhabi- 
tants. 

6. Bethphage, a village at the foot of Mount Olivet, between 
Bethania and Jerusalem. To this place our Redeemer, coming 
from Bethania. sent his disciples that they might procure an ass 
on which he would ride into Jerusalem. (St. Luke, xix, 29, 
and St. Matt., xxi, 1.) 

7. Emmaus. a small village of Judea, sixty furlongs distant 
from Jerusalem, on the northern side of the city. It is cele- 
brated on account of the conversation between our Lord and 
two of the disciples who were going thither on the day of the 
resurrection. (St. Luke, xxiv, 13.) 

8. Ephraim, or rather Ephrem, a considerable city of Judea, 
eight miles north of Jerusalem, and near a desert of the same 
name, to which our Redeemer retired after raising Lazarus from 
the dead. (John, xi, 54.) 

9. Gaza was a celebrated city of the Holy Land. At the 
distribution under Josue it fell to the lot of the tribe of Juda. 
(Josue, xv, 47.) It was one of the five principalities of the 
Philistines, and we find it for a considerable time after Josue a 
formidable city to the Jews. Sampson carried away its gates, 
(Judges, xvi, 1,) and there Sampson died, having pulled down 
the temple of the god of the Philistines. (Judges, xvi, 30.) In 
after times Gaza fell successively under the dominion of several 
masters. At length it was laid waste by Alexander the Great. 
After which event, a new and smaller town of the same name 
being built nearer to the sea, the ancient Gaza fell to decay. 
The "Gaza mentioned in Acts (viii, 26) is the ancient city which 
is now desert. The ancient city was distant about sixty miles 
south-west from Jerusalem. 



OF THE HOLY LJlND, ETC. 



271 



10. Jericho, a celebrated city in the tribe of Benjamin, often 
mentioned in the ~New Testament. It was distant about nineteen 
miles from Jerusalem. It was the first city taken from the 
Chanaanites by Josue. The wonderful manner in which it was 
taken is described in the book of Josue. (vi, 1.) Josue pro- 
nounced an anathema against any one who would rebuild it, 
saying, " In his first born let him lay the foundation thereof, 
and in the last of his children let him put on the gates a curse 
which was literally fulfilled afterwards in Hiel, the Bethelite. 
(3 Kings, xvi, 34.) After being rebuilt by Hiel, it became a 
nourishing town, and in the time of our Redeemer it was rich 
and populous. Here He performed some of His miracles ; and 
here was the house of Zacheus, the publican, which he honoured 
by His presence. Jericho is at present a wretched village. Its 
modern name is Rihah. 

11. Joppe was a maritime city of Palestine, the only port of 
the Mediterranean frequented by the Jews. This city is fre- 
quently mentioned both in the Old and JSew Testament. It is 
now called Jaffa. 

12. Lydda ; this Town of Judea was called in later times 
Diospolis, it is now known by the name of Loudd. It was not 
far distant from Joppe, lying on the way from the latter place 
to Jerusalem. It is celebrated in the Acts of the Apostles for 
the cure of a paralytic named Eneas, by St. Peter. (Acts, ix, 32, 
33, 34.) 

13. Rama, a small town in the tribe of Benjamin, about 
thirty miles north of Jerusalem. This place is frequently 
mentioned in the Old Testament. St. Matthew also mentions 
it, (ii, 18,) where he quotes a passage of Jeremias, with reference 
to the massacre of ths Innocents. Rama appears to have been 
a place of great importance formerly. It was advantageously 
situated, lying immediately in the high road from Joppe to 
Jerusalem. At present the number of its inhabitants is not much 
above five thousand. 

In Samaria the remarkable towns, at the time of our Re- 
deemer's public ministry, were : 

I. The City of Samaria. — From about the year 935 before 
Christ, this city was the capital of the kingdom of Israel, as dis- 
tinguished from the kingdom of Juda. After the ruin of the 
kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians it became the chief seat of 
the people whom the king of Assyria planted in the desolated 
country ; who were hence called Samaritans. The town was 
utterly destroyed by Hircanus, the high priest and ruler of the 
Jews, in the year 129 before Christ. In this state it remained 
until the time of Herod the Great ; who, being pleased with the 



272 



OP THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY 



situation, rebuilt the city, and called it Sebaste, (a Greek word, 
equivalent to the Latin Augusta) in honour of the emperor 
Augustus. At present there is only to be found on the site of 
the ancient city a miserable village called Sehustien, the Arabic 
form of Sebaste. The city of Samaria is scarcely ever referred 
to in the New Testament; but the district or province of 
Samaria is often mentioned. 

II. Sichem, called also Sichar, now Naplouse or JSapolose, a 
city of the province of Samaria, about forty miles distant from 
Jerusalem. After the destruction of Samaria by Hircanus, it 
became the metropolis of the Samaritans. Eeside it is the well 
of Jacob, memorable for our Saviour's discourse with the Samari- 
tan woman. (John, iv, 6.) Beside the city was " part of the 
field which Jacob had bought of the sons of Hemor," which 
Jacob afterwards gave to Joseph as an addition to his inheritance, 
and in which the bones of Joseph are buried. (Josue, xxiv, 32.) 

The remains of the sect of the Samaritans, now but few in 
number, chiefly reside here. 

III. Antipatris, a small town of the province of Samaria, 
lying on the way between Jerusalem and Cesarea of Palestine. 
It was only from the time of Herod the Great that it had the 
name of Antipatris ; which Herod gave to it in honour of his 
father Antipater. Herod, moreover, rebuilt and beautified the 
town. Antipatris is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, as 
the place to which St. Paul was brought by night after his 
apprehension at Jerusalem. (Acts, xxiii, 31.) 

In Upper Galilee, the most remarkable town in connexion 
with the gospel history was Csesarea Philippi. 

C cesarea Philip2 } h formerly called Paneas, was situated at the 
foot of Mount Paneas, near the source of the Jordan. It was 
first called Lais. When the tribe of Dan made themselves 
masters of it they gave it the name of Dan. (Judges, xviii, 
7-29.) However, Eusebius and St. Jerome say that Caesarea 
Philippi, (formerly called Paneas,) was a distinct place from 
Dan, (formerly called Lais,) and that these two towns were four 
miles asunder. It is thought that the name Paneas was imposed 
upon it by the Phoenicians — or rather the name which it origi- 
nally had was Banias, which the Greeks and Eomans called 
Paneas. It was rebuilt, or at least beautified by Philip the 
tetrarch, who gave it the name of Cassarea, in honour of Tiberius 
Caesar. Caesarea was a day's journey from Sidon, and a day 
and a-half from Damascus. In the vicinity of this city took 
place the conversation between our Eedeemer and His apostles, 
in which such illustrious promises were made by Him to St. 
Peter above all the rest. (Matt., xvi.) This city has dwindled 



OE THE HOLY LAJSTX), ETC. 



273 



into an insignificant village, and has resumed again the name of 
Banias. — In lower Galilee there were many cities, illustrious in 
the Gospel history. 

1. Tiberias, a celebrated city of lower Galilee, situated on 
the coast of the sea of Genesareth, which was also called the 
lake or sea of Tiberias. It was built by Herod the tetrarch, and 
named Tiberias in honour of Tiberius Caesar. At present it is 
called by the natives Tabaria or Tabareah, and has a population 
of between fifteen hundred and two thousand souls, who are 
principally Jews. 

2. Corozain, a town on the western coast of the sea of 
Galilee, not far distant from Capharnaum. It was one of the 
places most frequently favoured by our Redeemers preaching 
and miracles. Its obdurate inhabitants, however, not having 
corresponded with the graces bestowed upon them, are severely 
upbraided by the Redeemer in the Gospel. (St. Matt., xi, 21; 
St. Luke, x, 13.) This town has long since disappeared. 

3. Bethsaicla was a town beyond the Jordan, on the coast of 
the sea of Tiberias. Its situation was near the entrance of the 
Jordan into this sea of Tiberias. Philip the tetrarch enlarged 
and ornamented this city, and gave to it the name of Julias, in 
honour of the daughter of the Roman emperor Augustus. It was 
the residence of the Apostles, Peter, Andrew, and Philip, (John, 
i, 44.) Like Corozain, it was frequently visited by our 
Eedeemer during His public ministry; it heard His discourses, 
and witnessed His miracles ; but it imitated Corozain in its infi- 
delity. See St. Matthew, (xi, 21). It must be observed here 
that Reland in his Palcestina, p. 653, is supposed by many to 
have accurately distinguished two Bethsaidas, one on the western, 
and the other on the north-eastern border of the lake or sea of 
Tiberias. The former was the city of Andrew and Peter. The 
other was the Bethsaida of Gaulonitis, afterwards called Julias. 
Both of these towns have disappeared. 

4. Nazareth, a small city in the district of Zabulon, in the 
lower Galilee. It is celebrated in the scriptures as having been 
the residence of our Divine Redeemer for so many years : there 
He became incarnate : there He was brought up in subjection 
to Joseph and Mary : from it He was called a j^azarene. At 
present it is called Nassara : the number of its inhabitants is 
stated to be about 3,000, mostly Christians. 

5. Cana, a small town of Galilee, remarkable as being the 
place in which our Redeemer performed His first miracle. It 
was called Cana of Galilee, to distinguish it from another Cana 
which belonged to the tribe of Aser, and was situated near to 
the city of Sidon. (Josue, xix, 28.) It is commonly supposed to 

T 



274 



OP THE HISTOKICAL GEOGRAPHY 



have been the place now called Kefr Kenna. It is still a neat 
village, having a large spring in the neighbourhood, supposed to 
be that from which the water was drawn at our Lord's visit. 
Dr. Robinson {Biblical Researches, vol. 3, p. 204-208,) does not 
subscribe to this common opinion about the present site of Cana. 

6. Capharnaum, a town of Galilee, on the coast of the sea of 
Tiberias, and on the borders of the districts of the tribes of 
Zabulon and jSephthali. It was the usual abode of our Redeemer 
during the greater part of the time of His public ministry. 
Hence it is called His own city. (^Matthew, ix, 1.) Notwith- 
standing the many miracles which they witnessed, the great 
mass of its inhabitants were inattentive to our Saviour's instruc- 
tions. Hence, He pronounces a woe upon them. (Hatt. xi, 23.) 
Near to this city was the Custom-house, in which St. Matthew, 
then a publican, sat, when He was called by Christ to be His 
disciple. It was obviously a place of great consideration at the 
time of which the gospel history treats ; but at present there is 
scarcely a remnant of it to be found. 

7. Nairn, a town of Galilee, not far from Capharnaum ; where 
Christ raised to life a widow's son, whom they were carrying 
to the tomb. (St. Luke, vii, 11-15.) It is now a small hamlet, 
having the name of Xein. 

8. Ccesarea of Palestine, was so called, because, when the 
Iiomans governed Palestine, they made Csesarea the metropolis ; 
and there was the residence of the Roman governor. This city 
was about thirty-five miles from Jerusalem. It had been formerly 
called the Tower of Strato. It was Herod the Great who, 
having enlarged and beautified the city, named it Csesarea, in 
honour of Augustus. It is very frequently mentioned in the 
New Testament, Here St. Peter baptized Cornelius, the cen- 
turion. (Acts, x.) Here St. Philip, the deacon, resided. (Acts 
xxi, 8.) Here St. Paul was detained by the Roman governors, 
Pelix and Festus, before being sent to Pome ; at which time 
he made his defence against the Jews and their orator 
Tertullus : (Acts, xxiv,) and again before departing from the 
city he justified his conduct in the presence of King Agrippa. 
(Acts, xxvi.) Wherever in the scripture Ceesarea is mentioned 
without any addition, this is the city which is designated. At 
present Csesarea retains nothing of its former splendour. 

9. Ptolemais, anciently called Acco, (Judges, i, 31,) is situated 
on the coast of the Mediterranean, on the confines of lower and 
upper Galilee. Here St. Paul rested for one day, on his journey 
from Ephesus to Jerusalem. (Acts, xxi, 7.) The crusaders 
gave to this city the name of St. John D'Acre. It is now com- 
monly known by the name of Acre. 



OF THE HOLT LAJS T D. ETC. 



275 



We shall not delay to make any particular observations on 
the cities of Decapolis, the names of which, according to the 
more probable opinion, we have already given : of these, Scytho- 
polis, the chief city, was on the western side of the Jordan. 
Gadara, according to Josephus, was the metropolis of Persea, or 
of the region beyond the Jordan. 

Damascus, the celebrated capital of Syria, is a very ancient 
and celebrated city ; but, although it occasionally fell under 
Hebrew or Jewish dominion, it does not appear that it could 
properly be called a Hebrew city. Mention is made of it both 
in the Old and New Testament. Some have ascribed the build- 
ing of it to Abraham. The city certainly existed as early as the 
days of Abraham ; as is clear from Genesis, xiv, 15 ; xv, 2 ; but, 
the way in which it is spoken of in these passages shows, that 
even at the time to which they refer, it was not a new nor an 
unknown place. In the New Testament it is mentioned in con- 
nexion with the conversion and first preaching of the Apostle 
St. Paul. (Acts, ix, 3-20.) The spot where Saul, on his way 
to Damascus, saw the light Irom heaven, is still pointed out, 
according to the tradition preserved among the Christians of the 
country ; as is also the part of the wall at which the apostle was 
let down in a basket, to escape the indignation of the Jews. 
(Acts, ix.) Damascus is still an important city. Lamartine 
estimates its population at 300,000, of whom 30,000 are Chris- 
tians. Others, however, are of opinion that this writer has 
much overrated the number of its inhabitants. 

We shall now conclude this part with observing, that of all 
the once splendid and populous cities of Palestine, scarcely any- 
thing but some ruins remain to attest their ancient grandeur. 
Where their sites are still marked by modern towns, these are, 
comparatively, but poor and insignificant. If we may except 
J erusalem — yet, Jerusalem itself, steeped in poverty, its inhabi- 
tants not exceeding at the most 15,000 souls, is but the shadow 
of that city which was once so powerful and magnificent. 



276 MOUNTAINS. 



DISSERTATION XIV. 

02f THE PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE HOLY LA> T D. 



SECTIOX I. 

MOUNTAINS. 

Palestine is a mountainous country : two chains of mountains — 
one on the west of the Jordan, the other on the east of that 
river — stretch from Syria to Arabia ; these are, in several places 
broken by plains more or less extensive. The principal moun- 
tains of Palestine are : — 

First. — Libanus, which is composed of two chains or ridges, 
in the midst of which is situated the great valley, called by the 
ancients Ccelesyria. The Greeks gave the name of Anti-Libanus 
to the eastern ridge, and of Libanus to the western. The He- 
brews did not make such a distinction, but called both by the 
common name of Libanus. It is upon this mountain that once 
grew these magnificent cedars so celebrated in history, especially 
in the Holy scripture. These trees are of a prodigious height 
and girth. It appears, however, by the accounts of travellers, 
that the number of the ancient trees is now very small — these 
are known by their extraordinary height, and the vast circum- 
ference of the trunk : some are found to have thirty-five, and 
even forty feet of circumference. Anti-Libanus is more elevated 
than Libanus, and has its summit constantly cohered with snow : 
although on the highest point of mount Libanus snow is also 
found, even in summer. The chief summit of Anti-Libanus was 
called by the J ews Hermon. The height of these mountains is 
from nine thousand to nine thousand six hundred feet. These 
two ridges, Anti-Libanus and Libanus, run parallel to each other, 
from the neighbourhood of Sidon on the west, to the vicinity of 
Damascus eastward, and form the extreme northern boundary 
of the Holy land. 

Second. — Carmel is a chain of mountains, situated about ten 
miles to the south of Ptolemais or Acre, on the coast of the 
Alediterranean. These mountains, and the valleys which inter- 
sect them, form a most beautiful district of country. The sum- 
mits of the mountains are covered with oak and fir trees ; whilst 
the valleys are shaded by the laurel and olive trees, and watered 



MOUNTAINS. 



277 



by an infinite number of streams. The greatest height of Carmel 
is about two thousand one hundred feet. In the territory of 
the tribe of Juda there was another Mount Carmel, and a city 
of the same name. 

Third. — Thabor, a mountain in Galilee, of a conical form, 
entirely detached from any neighbouring mountain. It stands 
upon one side of the great plain of Esdrelon, and is computed to 
be nearly one mile in height. On its summit there anciently 
stood a city, the ruins of which are still to be seen. Jahn sup- 
poses that this city was no other than the Thabor in the tribe of 
Zabulon, mentioned in 1 Para-lip., vi, 77. According to ancient 
tradition this mount was the scene of the transfiguration of 
our Lord. 

Fourth. — The mountains of Israel, called also the mountains 
of Ephraim, occupy the very centre of the Holy land, and stand 
opposite to the mountains of Juda. In both ranges the soil is 
fertile, except in those ridges of the mountains of Israel which 
lie near the region of the Jordan ; and also with the exception 
of the chain which extends from Mount Olivet, near Jerusalem, 
to the plain of Jericho ; which latter has been always famous 
for affording lurking places to robbers. (Josue, xvi, 18; xviii, 
17 ; Luke, x, 30.) The most elevated summit of this riclge is 
now known by the name of Quarantania, and is supposed to 
have been the scene of our Saviour's temptation. (Matt., iv, 8.) 
In Deuteronomy and Josue, mention is made of the mountains 
Hebal and Garizim, situated the one to the north, the other to 
the south of Sichem or Napolose. The Samaritans had their 
temple on Mount Garizim. Here we may mention Mount Moria, 
on which Solomon built his temple ; and Swn, on which stood 
the city of David. These two were closely united, and formed 
a part of the site of Jerusalem, from the time of David. 

The Mount of Olives, or Mount Olivet, so called on account 
of the great number of olive trees which covered it, stood at a 
short distance from Jerusalem : from it Christ ascended to 
heaven. Near to the city of Jerusalem stood also Mount Calvary, 
upon which our Saviour accomplished the great work of the 
redemption of mankind. 

Fifth. — Not many miles distant from Mount Thabor, to the 
south and south-east, rises a range of hills which -advances to 
the borders of the Jordan, and continues thence for some miles 
northward to bound the west of the valley of that river. This 
is the range which was formerly known by the name of the 
mountains of Gelhoe, and even now is called by the natives Djebel 
Gilbo. Here was the scene of that battle in which Saul and 
J onathan fell. Hence David, mourning for their death, says : 



278 



HOrXTAIXS. 



" Ye mountains of Gelboe, let neither dew nor rain come upon 
you," &c. (2 Kings, i, 21.) Travellers inform us that this 
mountainous ridge is of a sterile and arid character, in which it 
is remarkably distinguished from all the other mountains in its 
neighbourhood. 

Sixth. — The mountains of Galaad, situated beyond the Jordan, 
and extending in a long chain from Anti-Libanus to Arabia 
Petraea. They received different names in the different coun- 
tries which they traverse. The northern part of the range was 
known by the name of the mountains of Basan : these were once 
celebrated for their pastures and their stately oaks. The middle 
part of this range was called in a stricter sense, the mountain of 
Galaad ; whilst in the southern part lie the mountains of Abarim : 
among which the most eminent are ]S~ebo and Phasga, which 
form a continued ridge, and command a view of the whole land 
of Chanaan. It was from Mount 2s~ebo that Moses was permitted 
to take a view of the promised land before he died. (jSunib., 
xxvi, 12, 13.) 

Seventh. — -We may go a little outside of the limits of the 
land of the children of Israel, to mention the mountain of Sinai, 
famous as the place upon which Moses received from God the 
tables of the law : and the mountain of Horeb, upon which God 
appeared to Moses in the burning bush. (Exodus, iii, 1.) Both 
these mountains were situated in Arabia Petraea, and near to 
each other. 



SECTION II. 

PLAIXS AND VALLEYS OF THE HOLT LAND . 

The most remarkable plains are : — 

First. — The Coast of the Mediterranean Sea, from the 
southern limit of Palestine, which was near the Torrent of 
Egypt, (Ehin-corura,) as far as Mount Carmel. The tract of 
country from Gaza, as far as Joppe, was called simply the plain. 
In it were the rive celebrated cities of the Philistines: Gaza, 
Ascalon, Azoth or Azotus, Gath, and Accaron. Another tract, 
extending from Joppe to Carmel, was called Saron, and must 
not be confounded with another Saron lying between Thabor 
and the Lake of Genesareth ; nor yet with a third Saron situ- 
ated in the tribe of Gad, beyond the Jordan, and renowned for 
its pastures. 

Second. — The Plain of Jezreel, or Esdrelon, which extends 



PLAINS AND VALLEYS, ETC. 



279 



from Mount Carmel and the Mediterranean, to the place where 
the Jordan issues from the sea of Tiberias. It lies in the middle 
of the Holy Land. This was called the great plain. Hence, 
Josephus always refers to it by this name. It was from twenty- 
four to thirty miles long, and from twelve to fifteen broad. It 
was exceedingly fertile, abounding in wheat, wine, oil, and other 
valuable products. 

Third. — The district of Jordan, that is, the eastern and 
western shores of that river, extending from the Lake of Gene- 
sareth, as far as the Dead Sea. In this district was, 1st, the 
Plain of Jericho ; 2nd, the Yalley of the Salt Pits, beside the 
Dead Sea, (4th Kings, xiv, 7 ;) 3rd, the Plains of Moab, beyond 
the Jordan. Valleys abound in Palestine, as in all mountainous 
countries. We shall only speak of the following: — 

Pirst. — The Valley of Ennom, called also the Valley of the 
Children of Ennom. It lay near Jerusalem, on the south' side, 
and separated the tribe of Juda from that of Benjamin. This 
valley is celebrated as being the place in which human sacrifices 
were offered to the idol Moloch. The part of the valley in which 
the human victim was burned in honour of the idol was called 
Topheth, (4th Kings, xvi, 13; and xxi, 20 ; Jerem., vii, 31,) a 
name supposed to be derived from the Hebrew word to ph., a 
drum, because drums were beaten to drown the cries of the 
burning victims of Moloch. Prom this valley was derived the 
name Gehenna, which means the Valley of Ennom, and it is 
used by the scripture to designate the hell of the damned. (St. 
Matt., v, 22.) 

Second. — The Valley of Josaphat deserves particular notice, 
seeing that Christians generally, as well as Jews, believe that 
this shall be the scene of the general judgment. This belief 
has been founded on the words of the Prophet Joel, (iii, 12.) 
Opinions have been divided on the precise situation of the valley 
to which the prophet refers. However, it is generally supposed 
to be the valley lying between the city of Jerusalem and the 
Mount of Olives. It is rather more than a mile in length, but 
narrow. The brook of Cedron runs through it. Some, how- 
ever, are of opinion that the Prophet Joel did not refer to any 
place in particular when he used the words found in the text 
above referred to, but that he speaks symbolically of the Valley 
of GoaVs Judgment. In reality the Hebrew name or word 
Josaphat, signifies the judgment of God. (See Calmet's Dictionary 
on the word Josaphat. 



280 



DESEETS AND EOEESTS. 



SECTION III. 

DESERTS AND FOEESTS. 

When we speak of the deserts of Palestine, this expression is 
not to be understood generally as indicating regular wastes 
or bare wildernesses, but more frequently as signifying rather 
districts thinly peopled, and not cultivated, but either wholly, 
or for the most part used as pasture. At the same time there 
were in Palestine some deserts, bare, wild, and inhospitable. Of 
these the most important was that which is known in scripture 
by the name of the Desert of Juda, or of Judea. It commenced 
six miles south of Bethlehem, near the town of Thecue, and 
from thence stretched in an easterly course towards the Dead 
Sea ; its upper part being connected with the Desert of Engaddi, 
its centre with the Desert of Maon, and its lower extremity with 
the above-mentioned sea. It was in this desert that John the 
Baptist dwelt until the commencement of his public ministry of 
preaching and baptising, (St. Luke, i, 80,) and here he first 
taught his countrymen. (St. Matt., iii, 1.) 

Second. — The Desert of Engaddi is situated on the western 
coast of the Dead Sea ; beside it lies the Desert of Ziph. Both 
of them are remarkable for very high mountains and numerous 
caverns. More to the south lie the deserts of Maon, Carmel, 
and Thecue. These are parts of the Desert of Juda. The 
Desert of Jericho is no other than certain mountain ridges 
which lie between Mount Olivet and the City of Jericho. 
This desert is celebrated as the place of the forty days' fast of 
our Eedeemer. In it stands the mountain of Quarantania, which 
has been already described. Eecent travellers describe this 
desert as a most fearful wilderness, and highly dangerous, as it 
is the common resort of robbers and murderers. The Desert of 
Bethaven, appears to be a part of the mountains of Ephraim, 
lying towards the district of the Jordan. 

Third.- — The vast Desert of Arabia reaching from the eastern 
side of the Eed Sea to the confines of the land of Chanaan, in 
which the children of Israel sojourned after their departure from 
Egypt, is in the scripture particularly called the Desert. Very 
numerous are the allusions made to it in the sacred writings. This 
notice of it must be sufficient here, seeing that our business is 
with the description of the Holy Land, in which this desert was 
not comprised. Jahn (Archceologia), very well observes that 
the deserts mentioned in scripture are of two kinds, whilst all 



LAKES AXD EIVEES, 



281 



of them agree in the general character of being uncultivated 
tracts. Some are mountainous, which are well supplied with 
water, having numerous fountains ; others have the surface 
plain, are covered for the most part with a barren sand, and in 
these a fountain is of exceedingly rare occurrence. The Desert 
of Arabia, in which the Jews sojourned after leaving Egypt, 
was remarkable above all the deserts mentioned in scripture for 
its great barrenness, and its want of water. 

As to the forests, we find mention made of the following : — 
First. — The Forest of Cedars, on Mount Libanus, often 
referred to by the sacred writers. Some very old cedars are still 
to be seen on the mount. A late traveller, Mr. Buckingham, 
informs us, " That there are about twenty very large trees, some of 
them with trunks ten or twelve feet in diameter, and branches 
of corresponding strength, each of which shoots out to a great 
extent like a large tree from the parent trunk." 

Second. — The Forest of Oaks, on the mountains of Basan. 
(Zach., xi, 2.) 

Third. — The Forest of Ephraim, which the Ephraimites be- 
gan to cut down ; (Josue, xvii, 15;) but which was still standing 
in the time of David. (2nd Kings, xviii, 6, 8, 17.) The wood, 
near Bethel, mentioned in 4th Kings, (ii, 24,) appears to have 
been a part of the Forest of Ephraim. 

Fourth. — the extensive Forest of FLareth, in the tribe of Juda, 
to which David withdrew to avoid the fury of Saul. (1st Kings, 
xxii, 5.) 

Fifth. — To these may be added the wood of thickets, on the 
banks of the Jordan, called in Zach., xi, 3, The pride of the 
Jordan. From these and several other forests not mentioned 
here, Palestine was abundantly supplied with wood in former 
times, so that it was by no means necessary for the people to 
have recourse to the miserable expedients to which the inhabi- 
tants of that country are now driven for the purpose of providing 
fuel. 



SECTION IV. 

LAKES AND EIVEES. 

The remarkable lakes of Palestine are, the Lake of Merom and 
the Lake of Genesareth, both of which are intersected by the 
Jordan ; and lastly, the Lake of Sodom, called also the Asphaltite 
Lake, and the Dead Sea. Into this the Jordan empties itself. 



282 



LAKES AND MYERS. 



First. — The Lake of Merom. According to Josephus, who 
calls this the Lake Samochonitis, its dimensions are seven miles 
long, by half that breadth. In reality its dimensions vary with 
the different seasons of the year ; but, Josephus appears to give 
the fair average extent of the lake. This lake is not mentioned 
in the New Testament : in the Old Testament it is called, the 
waters of Merom. (Josue, xi, 5.) 

Second. — The Lake of Genesareth is very frequently men- 
tioned in the New Testament. It is called also the Sea of 
Galilee, the Sea of Tiberias, and the Sea of Genesareth. The 
name of Genesareth appears to have been derived from a town 
of that name, which had formerly occupied the site, on which, 
in the time of Christ, stood the city of Tiberias. As to the name 
of sea, which was given to this lake, this was in conformity with 
the usage of the Jews, who called every large expanse of water 
by the name of sea. In estimating the dimensions of this lake 
travellers do not agree. According to Mr. Buckingham's 
estimate, which is, perhaps, the most accurate that has been 
formed — " Its greatest length runs nearly north and south, 
from twelve to fifteen miles, and its breadth seems to be, in 
general, from six to nine miles.' ' Over this lake our Divine 
Eedeemer repeatedly passed during His public ministry ; and it 
is mentioned in connection with several of the gospel narratives. 
The Jewish writers dwell with enthusiasm on the excellencies of 
this noble lake — the transparency of its waters — the great 
abundance of fish which it contains —the fertility of its coast, 
and the sublime scenery which surrounds it. 

Third. — The Lake of Sodom, or Sea of Sodom, called also the 
Bead Sea, has been celebrated not only by the sacred writers, 
but also by Josephus and several profane authors. It was 
anciently called, as we learn from scripture, the Sea of the 
Plain, (Deut., iii, 17), because it occupied the place where once 
stood the cities of the plain — Sodom and the other cities of Pen- 
tapolis. It was called also the Salt Sea, (Deut., iii, 17), from 
the extremely saline and bitter taste of its waters. Also the 
East Sea (Ezech., lxvii, 18), from i^s situation, relatively to 
the Mediterranean, called by the Jews the West Sea. By 
Josephus and other writers it is called the Lake Asphaltites, 
from the abundance of asphaltos or bituminous matter found in 
it. The name of the Dead Sea was given to it in consequence 
of the impression which universally prevailed among the ancients 
that no living thing was to be found in it. Some modern 
travellers, however, assure us, that a small species of fish is 
found in it, such as is altogether peculiar to this lake. As to 
the extent of this lake, modern travellers commonly estimate its 



LAKES AXD MYERS. 



283 



length to be about seventy-two English miles, and its greatest 
breadth to be nearly nineteen. The place now occupied by the 
waters of this lake was, before the destruction of Pentapolis, an 
agreeable and fertile valley, watered by the Jordan, and com- 
pared for beauty to the Garden of Eden. At present the J ordan 
empties itself into this lake. Before the conflagration and 
destruction of Sodom and the other cities, it is considered proba- 
ble, that the Jordan divided itself into streams in this valley, by 
means of which an extraordinary fertility was communicated to 
this delightful region ; and that the river then buried itself in 
the earth : and it is, therefore, supposed, moreover, that even 
before the disaster recorded in scripture, the Dead Sea existed 
as a subterraneous lake, covered with a thick crust, in a great 
measure formed and supported by the asphaltos or bituminous 
matter. Even at present, masses of this bituminous substance 
are seen to rise and float upon the lake. TTe read in Genesis, 
that before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha there were 
in this valley many pits of bitumen, which came, no doubt, from 
the subterraneous lake. God, having caused fire to descend 
upon the valley, the bitumen was inflamed, and the earth, which 
had covered the lake, being thus deprived of the support of the 
bituminous stratum on which it rested, was precipitated in the 
waters, and thus the lake became apparent. As the waters of 
the Jordan and of several other rivers flow unceasingly into this 
lake, and as there is no visible outlet from it, it must be. that it 
makes its way by subterraneous passages, either to the Red Sea 
or to the Mediterranean. Everything which is thrown into this 
lake is immediately covered with a saline crust ; and so great is 
the specific gravity of the water from the quantity of saline 
matter which it holds in solution, that it will support a man 
lying motionless on its surface. Josephus informs us, that when 
the Emperor Yespasian came to see this lake he caused several 
men, who knew not how to swim, and whose hands were bound 
behind them, to be cast into it ; and Josephus adds, that all 
these floated on the surface. (Josephus, TTars of the Jews, book 
iv, chapter 8.) This great specific gravity of the water is pro- 
claimed also by modern travellers, who have themselves tested 
its power. One of these, quoted by Kitto, in his Pictorial 
History of Palestine, says, that ' l he could have lain and read 
there with perfect ease." (Volume ii, chapter 6, of The Physical 
History, page 204.) On the plain of this lake grows the 
solanum melongena, or mad apple, called the apple of Sodom ; 
and referred to, moreover, in scripture by the name of the bitter 
grape of the vine of Sodom. (Deut., xxxii, 32; Prov., xv, 19; 
Mich., vii, 4 ; Wisd., x, 7.) This fruit is beautiful to the eye, 



284 



LAKES AND RIVERS. 



but the interior is like ashes. This is supposed to be the work 
of a certain insect. When the fruit is attacked by this insect 
the skin is pierced with a hole scarcely perceptible, and remains 
apparently perfect, and of a beautiful colour, while the inside 
is converted into a powder like dust or ashes. 
As for rivers : 

The only river in Palestine which has a considerable volume 
of water is the Jordan. The source of this river is the Lake 
Phiala, at the foot of Anti- Lib anus. The discovery of its true 
source was made in the time of Philip, tetrarch of Trachonitis, 
as it is related by Josephus. Leaving the Lake Phiala, it runs 
for some miles under ground until it emerges to the light from a 
cave in the vicinity of the city of Paneas, (or Caesarea Philippi, 
now called Banias). It flows then due south, intersecting the 
Lake Merom, and the Lake of Genesareth ; and after making a 
course of about one hundred miles from its emerging at Paneas 
it loses itself in the Dead Sea. Its breadth and depth are various. 
Dr. Shaw computed it to be, on the average, about thirty yards 
broad, and three yards or nine feet in depth ; and states, that it 
discharges daily into the Dead Sea about 6,090,000 tons of 
water. Anciently the Jordan overflowed its banks about the 
beginning of the harvest time, that is, about the middle of 
April, when, the snows being dissolved on the mountains, the 
torrents discharged themselves into its channel with great im- 
petuosity. (Josue, iii, 15, and iv, 18; 1st Paralip., xii, 15.) 
Hence, we find that in the vicinity of Jericho, of which place 
we speak, each side of the river has two banks, one of which 
marks the swollen state of the river, and the other marks the 
ordinary breadth of its channel. Many recent travellers were 
of opinion that the river did not, in latter times, ever overflow 
its ordinary banks ; but not having visited the river at the pro- 
per season they were not properly qualified to pronounce upon 
the matter. A still more recent traveller than any of these, 
Dr. Eobinson, having visited the river in the harvest season, 
testifies, that he found it overflowing the banks of its ordinary 
channel. 

The name Jordan is supposed by many to be derived from the 
Hebrew word yeor, a river, and Ban, the name of that Jewish 
city, which many have confounded with Paneas, or Caesarea 
Philippi. (However, the two cities stood very near to each 
other.) Glaire prefers the opinion which derives the name 
Jordan from the Hebrew verb yarad, to descend. Besides the 
Jordan, there are several smaller rivers and brooks in Palestine. 
Of these several fall into the Dead Sea, viz. : Pirst, the Saphia, 
or Saphria, which is rather a considerable river ; Second, the 



TEMPERATURE OP THE HOLY LAXD. 



285 



Zered, which runs beyond the Jordan, on the frontiers of the Moa- 
bites ; Third, the Torrent of Arnon, which has its source in the 
valleys of Galaad ; and Fourth, the torrent, or Brook of Cedron. 

This last, which traverses the Yalley of Josaphat, between 
Jerusalem and the Mount of Olivet, is dry for almost the entire 
year, except in the spring season. Over this brook our Divine 
Redeemer crossed with His disciples when at the approach of 
His Passion, He went to pray to His Heavenly Father, as it 
is related in the gospel : and, in a word, whenever he went from 
Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives, He passed over this stream. 

The scripture speaks of several other rivers or torrents, 
viz. : — 

Pirst. — The Bolus, or Beleus, which falls into the Mediter- 
ranean, near Ptoleniais. The sand of this river was formerly 
employed in the manufacture of glass — a circumstance which has 
given to it some celebrity. 

Second. — The Torrent of Cison, Cisson, or Kisson : it rises at 
the foot of Mount Thabor, on the northern side of the mount : it 
is divided near its source into two streams, of which the smaller 
flows eastward into the Sea of Galilee, and the larger, taking a 
westerly course through the plain of Esdrelon, discharges itself 
into the Mediterranean Sea. 

Third. — The Torrent of Carta, or the Brook of Reeds, which, 
going from east to west, separated the tribe of Ephraim from that 
of Manasscs, (Josue, xvii, 8, 9,) and discharged itself into the 
sea to the south of Caesarea. 

Fourth. — The Torrent or Brook of JEscol, which, rising in 
the Mountains of Juda, entered the sea near Ascalon. 

Fifth. — The Torrent or Brook of Besor : its course lay to 
the south of the tribe of Simeon, and it discharged its waters into 
the Mediterranean, near Gaza. 

Sixth. — The Torrent of J aloe, which, rising in the mountains 
of Galaad, falls into the Jordan, near the Sea of Tiberias. 

Seventh. — The Torrent or Brook of Jaser, which fell into a 
lake that was called the Sea of Jazer. 



SECTION Y. 

TEMPERATURE OF THE HOLT LAKD. 

Ox the temperature of Palestine we have to observe, in the first 
place that it is, of course, somewhat different in the different 
parts of the country. However, without dwelling upon this 
difference, it will be sufficient for our purpose to mark the varia- 
tion of the temperature, according to the six periods or seasons 



288 



TEMPERATURE OE THE HOLT LAXD. 



into which the Easterns, from the earliest times, have divided 
the year. These are, as they occur in Genesis, (viii, 22,) seed 
time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter. We shall 
speak of them in the order in which they succeed each other, 
beginning with the first, harvest, which commences in the 
middle of April, and ends in the middle of June. The sky is 
generally fair and serene throughout this season. Towards the 
end of April the heat of the sun becomes excessive in the plain 
of Jericho, though in other parts of Palestine the weather is 
most delightful, and on the sea coast the heat is tempered by 
morning and evening breezes from the sea. JSext comes 

Second. — The summer, beginning with the middle of June, 
and ending with the middle of August. The heat of the 
weather is now greatly increased, and the nights are so warm 
that the inhabitants sleep in the open air, on the flat roofs of 
their houses. 

Third. — The season of heat succeeds, extending from the 
middle of August to the middle of October. The heat is now 
excessive. From the middle of April to the middle of Septem- 
ber, there is neither rain nor thunder. (Prov. xxvi, 1 ; 1st Kings, 
xii, 17.) In the beginning of the harvest season, a morning 
cloud is sometimes seen, which, as the sun ascends the horizon, 
gradually disappears. But in the months of 3Jay, June, July, 
and August, not even a cloud is to be seen, and the earth derives 
its moisture then altogether from the heavy dews that fail during 
the nights. The dew, so refreshing for the parched earth is 
frequently taken in the scripture as the symbol of the Divine 
beneficence. (See Genesis, xxvi, 28 ; xlix, 25 ; Deuter., xxxii, 2 ; 
xxxiii,13, &c.) Copious, however, as this dew is, as the heat 
advances it is only sufficient to preserve the more robust plants : 
all the tender plants, unless watered from the rivers, or in some 
way by the art or labour of man, become parched and wither 
away. (Psalms, xxxii, 4.) And if at this time a spark should 
fall among the dried herbage, a conflagration ensues more or less 
considerable, according to the proximity of brambles or under- 
wood. (Ps., lxxxiii, 15 ; Isai., ix, 17 ; x, 14; Jerem., xxi, 14.) 
The soil by degrees becomes so hard as to exhibit large fissures 
or clefts. At length, in the latter part of September, rain falls 
for some days, by which not only is the air cooled, but the 
whole country begins again to assume a fresh and green appear- 
ance. 

Fourth.— Seed time is the next season, extending from the 
middle of October to the middle of December. The tempera- 
ture is now variable. The sky is often dark and cloudy, and 
rain falls frequently. That which is called the early rain in the 



FERTILITY OF THE SOIL, ETC. 



287 



scripture, so necessary for the crops, falls in the latter half of 
October. In the early part of this season the heat is often 
considerable ; bnt as the season advances the weather becomes 
cold, and the snow falls npon the mountains. In the latter part 
of November the trees lose their foliage. 

Fifth. — Winter is the fifth season, extending from the middle 
of December to the middle of February. The snow now falls 
on the plains, but it is rare to see it remaining for even one day, 
and the ice, never strong, melts away before the first rays of the 
sun. In this season the roads are slippery, and a journey is conse- 
quently attended with danger, particularly on the sloping path- 
ways of the mountains. (Jerem., xiii, 16; xxiii, 12.) A cold 
north wind now blows, and as the season advances the cold 
becomes intensely severe, particularly on the lofty mountains, 
which are covered with snow : so piercing is the cold sometimes 
that those who had not been accustomed to the climate could 
hardly endure it. Thunder, lightning, and hail-storms are also 
frequent during this season, and the heavy rains fill the brooks 
and livers. Towards the end of January, and the beginning of 
February, the trees resume their foliage, and the field and crops 
exhibit signs of renewed vegetation. 

Sixth. — Lastly comes the cold season, from the middle of 
February to the middle of April. At first the weather is cold, 
but it gradually becomes warm, and even hot, particularly in 
the plain country. Rain, thunder, and hail- storms continue; 
but, towards the end of this season they altogether cease. In 
the first half of April that rains falls which is called in scripture 
the latter rain. This rain contributed much to render the har- 
vest abundant. In fact, the autumnal or early rain, and the 
vernal or latter rain, were quite necessary for the fertility of the 
land ; and hence these were most anxiously looked for by the 
Jews. This, the scripture testifies in numerous places. (Lev., 
xxvi, 4; Deut., viii, 7 ; Isai., xxx, 23; Jerem., iii, 3; and 
many other places.) 



SECTION VI. 

FERTILITY OF THE SOIL OF THE HOLT LAXD. 

The scripture in several places speaks in the most glowing terms 
of the fertility of this land. The enemies of revelation, judging 
of the former condition of this country by its present neglected 
state under the Turkish government, have denied the truth of 



288 



OE THE HOLT LAND. 



these scriptural testimonies to its fertility. But, the impious 
falsehood of these men is demonstrated by all modern travellers 
of intelligence, who declare, that wherever the soil is cultivated 
it still gives proof of the greatest fertility. If tracts of the 
country are left bare and uncultivated, we must not forget that 
successive devastations of Assyrians, Babylonians, Romans, Sara- 
cens, Turks, &c, have left the country, to a great extent, 
without inhabitants to cultivate it. Neither must we forget, 
that the Turkish government, so far from encouraging agricul- 
ture, does, by oppressive exactions, throw the greatest obstacle 
in its way ; whilst it leaves the people without sufficient pro- 
tection against the predatory incursions of the Arabs. Yet, as it 
has been said already, the country still affords abundant proofs 
of wonderful fertility, wherever any care has been taken in its 
cultivation. These proofs are witnessed in its great variety of 
excellent fruit trees, its crops of corn, and even its excellent 
vines, in the few places where these are cultivated : for, we are 
not to expect an extensive cultivation of the vine in a country 
subject to Mahometan masters. The testimony of the scripture 
to the ancient nourishing condition of the Holy Land is fully 
borne out by Josephus, who, speaking even of Peraaa, which is 
now a desert tract, extols it for its vines and palm trees. ( Wars 
of the Jews, Book iii, c. 3, § 3.) Profane authors also bear 
testimony to the fertility of Palestine— Tacitus, Justin, the elder 
Pliny, Ammianus Marcellinus. Even the mountainous tracts 
which are supposed to have been the most barren part of the 
country, were exceedingly fertile, and capable of supporting a 
dense population. This point is well proved by Dr. Shaw in 
his travels, where he treats of the fertility of the Holy Land ; 
and with the following quotation from that intelligent traveller, 
we shall conclude our remarks upon this subject. He says : 
1 1 The mountainous parts therefore of the Holy land were so far 
from being inhospitable, unfruitful, or the refuse of the land of 
Chanaan, that in the division of this country, the moun- 
tain of Hebron was granted to Caleb as a particular favour. 
(Jos. xiv. 12.) We read likewise, that in the time of Asa, this 
hill country of Juda (2 Paral., xiv, 8,) mustered five hundred and 
eighty thousand men of valour ; an argument beyond dispute 
that the land was able to maintain them. Even at present, not- 
withstanding the want there has been for many ages of a proper 
culture and improvement, yet the plains and valleys, though as 
fruitful as ever, lie almost entirely neglected, whilst every little 
hill is crowded with inhabitants. If this part, therefore, of the 
Holv Land was made up only, as some object, of naked rocks and 
precipices, how comes it to pass, that it should be more frequented 



CALAMITIES TO WHICH, ETC. 



289 



than the plains of Esdrelon, Rama, Zabulon, or Acre, which are 
all of them very delightful, and fertile beyond imagination? 
It cannot be urged that the inhabitants live with more safety 
here than in the plain country, inasmuch as there are neither 
walls nor fortifications to secure their ' villages or encampments ; 
there are likewise few or no places of difficult access ; so that 
both of them lie equally exposed to the insults and outrages of 
an enemy. But the reason is plain and obvious, inasmuch as 
they find here sufficient conveniencies for themselves, and much 
greater for their cattle. For they themselves have here bread to 
the full, whilst their cattle browse upon richer herbage ; and 
both of them are refreshed by springs of excellent wacer, too 
much wanted, especially in the summer season, not only in the 
plains of this, but of other countries in the same climate. This 
fertility of the Holy Land which I have been describing, is con- 
firmed from authors of great repute, whose partiality cannot in 
the least be suspected in this account. Thus Tacitus, (lib. v, 
c. 6,) calls it uber solum ; and Justin, (Hist. lib. 36, c. 3.) " Sed 
non minor loci ejus apricitatis qaam ubertatis admiratio est. u — 
Shaw's Travels in Barlary and the Levant, vol. ii, p. 145. Third 
edition.) 



SECTION VII. 

CALAMITIES TO WHICH THE HOLT LAXD WAS LIABLE. 

Finally, we have to say something of the calamities with which 
this country was visited. For, fertile and beautiful as it was, 
this country was, notwithstanding, liable to certain severe cala- 
mities, which, however, as long as the Hebrews possessed the 
land in conformity with God's promise, were not permitted to fall 
with remarkable severity upon it, unless when the people by 
their sins had provoked the Divine indignation. 

First. — The Plague, which made its entrance from Egypt and 
the neighbouring countries. It is often mentioned in the sacred 
scriptures. It has been, from an early period, endemic in Egypt, 
being propagated by the over-crowded state of the cities, famine, 
a damp atmosphere, inundations, and marshy grounds. To 
these causes has been added in latter times the negligent mode 
of burying their dead, the graves being shallow and imperfectly 
covered. 

Second. — Earthquakes, which often cause there frightful 
disasters. This dieadiul calamity has furnished the prophets 

L r 



290 



CALAMITIES TO WHICH THE 



with several comparisons by which, they represent the downfall 
and destruction of states and kingdoms. (Isai. xxix, 7 ; liv., 10; 
Jerein. iv, 24; Agg., ii, 6-22.) We find described in Xitto's 
Pictorial History of Palestine, an earthquake which occurred in 
Palestine on the first of January, 1837 — (chapter fourth of Phy- 
sical History, p. 92.) This will give us some idea of the kind 
of calamity which the prophets had before their mind when they 
used this illustration. On this occasion, the lake of Tiberias 
experienced a violent concussion ; the town of Tiberias was 
entirely destroyed ; several other towns and villages were more 
or less injured : but the destruction of the town of Safet, the 
ancient Bethulia, was of all the most signal. Of the inhabitants 
of this place there were killed upwards of 5,000, and about 400 
wounded. On this, as on other occasions, Jerusalem escaped 
with comparative impunity, and was but slightly affected. 

Third. — Thunder storms, hail storms, inundations, excessive 
rains, tornadoes, or whirlwinds, were all frequent during the 
winter and cold seasons, and have supplied the sacred writers 
with several striking images and illustration s. The whirlwind 
was the precursor of thunder, lightning, and heavy rain. Its 
appearance was often terrible, from the furious manner in which 
it carried away in its vortex all light substances within its 
reach, such as branches of trees, stubble, &c. : but, it was in 
the sandy deserts that the whirlwind was peculiarly awful : here 
it often proved fatal to travellers, burying them under clouds of 
sand. 

Fourth.— The country was often laid waste by vast bodies of 
migrating locusts, whose depredations are one of the most terri- 
ble scourges with which a country can be visited. They are 
called by the people of the east the army of God ; and, in 
reality, they almost observe the order of an army in their march : 
they alight in the evening ; and in the morning, as the sun 
ascends, unless they find a supply of food where they are, they 
again take to flight, borne in the direction of the wind. (Prov., 
xxx, 27; Nah.j iii, 16 and 17.) They proceed in vast troops, 
(Jer., xlvi, 47,) occupying a space of two or three miles in 
length, and upwards of a mile in breadth; and when borne 
aloft, so close are their ranks, that they shut out the sun, and 
cause darkness on the land over which they pass. (Joel, ii, 2-10 ; 
Excel,, x, 15.) By the concussion of their wings they make a 
considerable noise (Joel, ii, 2) : alighting, they cover a large 
tract of ground to the depth of a cubit or a foot and a-half. 
(Joel, i. 5 ; ii, 11 ; Jud., vi, 5.) If the air be cold and moist, or 
i t ley be wet with the morning dew, they scarcely move until 
the have been dried and warmed by the sun. (Nah. iii, 17.) 



HOLT LAXD WAS LIABLE. 



291 



They creep on then in good order, and almost in the direct line 
northwards ; nor are they to be stopped by any obstacle. If 
trenches be dug before them they fill them up with their bodies, 
and the rest pass on : if fires be kindled in front of them along 
their line of march, they extinguish these by their multitude. 
They mount over walls and fences, and enter through the doors 
and windows of the houses. (Joel, ii, 7-9.) They devour every 
green thing, and strip the branches of the trees of their bark. 
When engaged in committing these ravages they make a noise 
which is compared to the crackling noise of fire among the dry 
stubble. (Joel, ii, 5.) What aggravates, in the highest degree, 
this awful calamity, is, that frequently one swarm is followed 
by a second, and sometimes by a third and fourth, until not a 
blade of grass or a green leaf remains in the unfortunate scene of 
tbeir devastation : so that the land, which before their visit was 
like a garden of pleasure, is left like a desolr.te wilderness. (Joel, 
ii, 3.) After having consumed everything, they fly away with 
the wind, leaving behind them a foetid odour, and, what is worse, 
leaving their eggs deposited in the ground, whence comes forth 
with the return of spring a new brood of destroyers, more 
numerous than the former. The locusts, borue on by the wind, 
generally perish in the sea ; and their dead bodies drifted in 
heaps on the shore, and there putrifying, emit a most offensive, 
and sometimes even a fatal smell. These migrating and de- 
structive locusts are larger than those which are sometimes seen 
in the southern parts of Europe, being five or six inches long, 
and as thick as a man's finger. The form of the head resembles 
that of a horse : hence, they are often compared to horses in the 
scripture. Their teeth are so sharp and strong, that we find 
them compared to the teeth of the lion by the Prophet Joel, (i, 
6.) In order to mark the certainty, variety, and extent of the 
depredations of the locusts, not fewer than eight or nine different 
appellations, expressive of their nature, are given to them in the 
sacred writings. At the same time, some, at least, of these 
names, mark also a variety of species. 

Fifth. — The inhabitants of the Holy Land were not unfre- 
juently visited with a scarcity of provisions, and sometimes even 
with absolute famine. Such a calamity generally proceeded 
either from the devastation of the locusts, or from the absence 
of the early and latter rains, so necessary for the crops. 

Sixth. — Of all the calamities with which this country was 
visited, the most terrible was the pestilential blast, called by the 
Arabs, the simoom, and by the Turks, samiel, both of which 
words mean : the poison- wind. The Hebrews designated it by 
the several appellations of, the burning tcind, the disastrous wind, 



292 



CALAMITIES TO "WHICH, ETC. 



the pestilential ivind. It blows in Persia, Babylonia, Arabia, 
and in the deserts of Egypt, in the months of June, July, and 
August ; but in Nubia it makes its visits also in March, April, 
September, October, and November. It never lasts for more 
than seven or eight, and rarely for more than two or three mi- 
nutes at a time ; but all persons whom it finds standing or in an 
erect posture in the open country, it kills in a moment. The 
bodies of those who die from the effects of this wind soon become 
black. Immediately after the passing of the fatal blast they 
seem like persons asleep ; but if a hand or limb of these be 
smartly pulled it separates from the body. This wind neither 
blows high in the atmosphere nor does the current descend 
below an altitude of two feet from the earth's surface ; hence, 
when persons perceive its approach they fall flat upon the face, 
with the feet turned towards the point from which the wind 
proceeds, and the mouth firmly applied to the earth, in order to 
avoid inhaling any portion of the poisoned atmosphere, The 
indications of the approaching simoom are, a redness in the dis- 
tant atmosphere, and, at its near approach, a certain haze-like 
appearance, in colour somewhat resembling the purple part of 
the rainbow. In the houses and cities its efficacy is not felt. 
The animals, even in the open country, are not killed by it, but 
they get a fit of trembling, and by a certain natural instinct, 
keep down the head whilst it passes. The greater one's distance 
is from the heart of the desert the less injurious are the effects 
of this wind. As for some writers, who have gone so far as to 
discredit the stronger effects which have been ascribed to this 
phenomenon, it is well observed by Kitto, (Pictorial Palestine, 
vol. ii ; Physical History, page cxliii.) — " The fact seems to us 
to be, that in this, as in a thousand other matters, people infer 
analogies between what they do see and what they do not see ; 
and in this they may be, and often are, wrong, from not knowing 
or not taking into account, the circumstances by which differ- 
ences and modifications may be and are produced. Travellers, 
whose routes almost always lie along the borders of the Great 
Desert, and who never visit those vast interior solitudes of sand 
which only the natives dare to traverse, witness only these 
phenomena in the most mild and mitigated forms, and thought- 
lessly infer that they must be equally mild in the very heart of 
the desert, although they know that the causes which produce 
them must there be operating with more intense effect. What 
we ourselves deduce from the balance of testimonies is, that 
these phenomena are exhibited with diminished force the greater 
our distance from the heart of the desert is increased ; and that 
the travellers who describe those mitigated phenomena, which 



OF THE ANCIENT GOVERNMENT, ETC. 



293 



alone they noticed in their border routes, have no right to deny 
the concurrent testimony of history, and of the natives which 
ascribe to them stronger developments and more ruinous effects, 
in the interior of the desert." 



DISSERTATION XV. 

ON THE POLITICAL ANTIQUITIES OE THE JEWS. 



CHAPTER I. 

OE THE ANCIENT GOVERNMENT OE THE HEBREWS. 

The ancient government of the Hebrews, as we understand it 
here, extends through the several epochs of the government 
under the patriarchs ; the government under Moses ; and the 
government from the time of Moses to the establishment of the 
kingly power in the person of Saul. 

First, then, we are to consider the patriarchal government. 
Abraham, having been called by God out of his own country, 
that he might become the head and father of a new and chosen 
people, consequently, he and his son, Isaac, were the first 
patriarchs of the Ilebreivs* Yet, it was only in the family of 
Jacob that the Hebrews grew into a people. The members of 
this family were at first subject merely to the paternal govern- 
ment of Jacob, their father. The paternal government, or that 
government which was exercised with supreme authority by a 
father over his children and domestics, was, of all forms of 
government, the most ancient. Although each of the sons of 
Jacob exercised supreme power in his own family, yet, Jacob 
appears, during his life, to have held a certain sway over all his 
descendants. Afterwards, when the people increased in Egypt, 
and the heads of families became numerous, there was in each 
tribe some person whom the heads of families of that tribe agreed 
together to consider and respect as prince of the tribe. This 
prince of the tribe would be generally selected on account of his 
age and experience. All these chiefs of the people, whether 
princes of tribes, or heads of families, come under the general 

* As to the origin of the name Hebrew, interpreters are divided ; many 
with. Estius, [in argumento Epistolce ad Hebrceos,) derive it from the 
Hebrew word nsy Seber, trans, beyond, and therefore, they say that it was 
given to Abraham first, and not to him until he had crossed the Euphrates 
to come into Chanaan. Others derive it from Heber, one of the ancestors 
of Abraham. This Heber was the father of Phaleg, in whose time the 
division of languages was made. (Gen. x.) 



294 



OP THE AXCTEXT GOYEKX^EXT 



designation of C^pT senes — elders, heads of the tribes. They ex- 
ercised over the community a paternal government, regulated 
according to the dictates of reason, and according to certain 
laws which custom had introduced. Their concern, however, 
was exclusively with the common interests of the people — other 
matters were still left in the hands of the fathers of families. At 
first the princes of the tribes wrote the genealogies of the tribes and 
families : afterwards they procured the assistance of scribes or 
notaries for this purpose ; and these latter became so important 
in the course of time, that a share in the government of the 
people was entrusted to them : they are mentioned in Exodus by 
the name of CHtttP Shoterim. (v, 14, 15, 19.) It is supposed 
that the Israelites, during their stay in Egypt, were left to be 
governed by their own magistrates ; these being held responsible 
to the king of the country for the manner in which they exercised 
their authority. (See the 5th chap, of Exodus.) And it is well 
observed by the learned Jahn that, " during the four hundred 
and thirty years that the descendants of Jacob remained in that 
country they learned much from the Egyptians, who for more 
than a century, united under the Pharaos of Memphis, were 
constantly improving their political institutions, perfecting the 
arts, and extending their knowledge of the sciences." {John! 8 
History of the Hebrew Commonwealth, p. 16, vol. I. London 
edition of the English translation. Anno 1829.) 

Second. — We have next to consider the state of the Hebrew 
government during the presidency of Moses. This was the funda- 
mental principle of the government established by God, through 
the ministry of Moses, viz. : " That God was not only to be, in 
a special manner, the God of the Hebrews, but was to be, more- 
over, their king." That is to say, was to exercise immediately 
in regard to the Hebrew nation that authority which vested in 
ordinary kings elsewhere. This government, therefore, is 
properly called a Theocracy. Among the Hebrews, then, 
idolatry was not only a crime against God, but also high treason 
against their king. The tabernacle was to be, at the same time, 
the place of Divine worship, and the royal palace : and tithes 
and first fruits whence Divine worship and its ministers would 
derive their support, were to be at the same time a tribute by 
which the people would acknowledge the kingly rule of God 
over them. Under God as king, and in conformity with His 
laws, Moses governed the nation as His viceroy or deputy. To 
Moses it belonged to command the people in war, and to judge 
them in time of peace : and disobedience to his orders was 
visited with the severest penalty. At the same time, this theo- 
cratical form of government, with Moses as minister or mediator 



OF THE HEBREWS. 



295 



between the King and the people, did not set aside all the 
institutions of the patriarchal time. The chiefs of the tribes, 
the heads of the families, and the scribes and genealogists, still 
retained a part of their ancient functions. Moses contented 
himself with appointing, in conformity with the advice of Jethro, 
his father-in-law, a number of minor judges, who should pre- 
side, some over a thousand, others over a hundred, others over 
fifty, and others, in fine, over ten persons. These judges dwelt 
among the people who belonged to their jurisdiction — they 
heard their causes, and decided upon them. In difficult cases 
an appeal lay to Moses, and after his time to the chief of the 
state, who, in pronouncing judgment, was to be guided by the 
high priest, the chief interpreter of the law. In each of the 
principal cities, the chiefs of the tribe — the chiefs of families — 
the shoterim or scribes — together with the judges, at least 
of the higher order, formed the senate of that city, or 
body of elders, by whom the government was administered in 
the city and all its neighbourhood. A tribe was represented by 
the assembly of all these elders ; and the entire nation, by the 
assembly of all the chiefs of the tribes. The Levites had also a 
high place in the Hebrew commonwealth. Their functions 
were hereditary ; and not only were they, as ministers of God, 
intrusted with the care of everything which appertained to the 
Divine worship, but also, as might be expected in a theocracy, 
many civil affairs were confided to their superintendence and 
direction. 

Third. — After the time of Moses, and down to the election 
of Saul as king, the plan of the Mosaic government continued 
to be carefully carried out under Josue and the Judges. And as 
we shall see afterwards, even when the kingly office was intro- 
duced, the fundamental principle of the theocracy was not 
altered. After the death of Moses, under whom the people 
were brought out of Egypt, and received the law, (so that he is 
styled the legislator of the Jews) Josue became the chief minister 
of God in the government of the Hebrews. At the same time, the 
special duty which devolved upon him was the introduction of the 
people into the promised laud. After him, for the space of more 
than 300 years, the chief office in the state was held in succes- 
sion by certain magistrates, who are called Judges in the scrip- 
ture, and the last of whom was Samuel. There was a great 
difference between the power of all these, and the kingly power 
which was afterwards introduced, as the scripture clearly testifies 
in several places. Thus, when the people offered to Gedeon and 
his posterity the kingly power, saying, " Do thou rule over us, 
and thy son, and thy son's son, because thou hast freed us from 



296 



OF THE AXCIEXT &OVER3TMENT 



the hand of Madian :" he answered, U I will not rule over you," 
— that is, I will not be your king — ''nor my son; but the 
Lord your God shall rule over you." (Judg., viii, 23.) 2sTow, 
Gedeon. although he rejected the kingly power which was thus 
offered to him, yet continued to preside over the people in capa- 
city of judge. Again, we see a clear difference pointed out 
between the two kinds of authority in the words of God to the . 
Judge Samuel, when the people demanded a king — " They have 
not rejected thee but me. that I should not reign over them." 
(1st Kings, viii, 7.) These words prove that the kingly rule and 
government of God was more immediate, in reference to the 
Hebrew people, before the installation of Saul, than it was after- 
wards, duririg his time and the time of his royal successors. In 
reality, the Judges, as is easily collected from their history, re- 
corded in scripture, were chiefs, who. for the greater part, first 
distinguished themselves by delivering the people from slavery 
and oppression, and afterwards during life governed them accord- 
ing to the ordinances of the law, and the counsel of the elders. 
They owed their elevation neither to family nor wealth, but 
were either wonderfully raised up by God. or stood indebted for 
the honourable office which they held to the election and invi- 
tation of the people. A threefold duty devolved upon the judge 
— First, to deliver the people from slavery, or the oppression of 
their enemies. Second, to preside in war ; for, these judges 
were the commanders of the army ; hence Josephus calls them 
crparrr/cjc. Third, to judge, in a more strict sense ; that 
is, to administer the law to the people, and to settle their dis- 
putes by a just sentence, as did, for example. Heli and Samuel. 
Of course, it would depend on the circumstances of the time 
whether or not each of the judges would be called upon to exer- 
cise all these duties. Hence, some of them, as Thola, Abesan, 
Ahialon, Abdon, are not mentioned as having carried on any war, 
but merely as presiding over the people, and administering the 
law to them. The inferiority of the power of the judges as com- 
pared with that of the kings appears in this : that the judges 
could neither make new laws, nor impose tributes on the people. 
[Moreover, the judges did not use the diadem and sceptre, 
nor were they attended by a royal retinue or guard, neither 
were they anointed as the kings were ; nor was their power 
hereditary in their families. See the Prcefatio in librum Judi- 
cum — inter Pr&loquia Bonfrerii.) In a word, the power of 
the judges did not in any way interfere with those immediate 
relations which God bore to the people as their king. During 
the time of their presidency we behold that part of the Mosaic 
plan of government fully carried out, according to which each 



OF THE HEBREWS. 



297 



tribe lived independent under the government of its own chiefs. 
If a difference arose between tribes, it was either amicably 
adjusted, or left to the arbitration of the elders of some tribe not 
concerned in the dispute, or submitted to the decision of the chief 
of the state for the time being or of the high priest. Notwith- 
standing, however, this independence of each tribe, there were 
several bonds by which all the tribes were united together, so as 
to form but one people. These were, the community of origin 
from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; a common hope in the same 
promises ; the necessity of mutual support against the common 
enemy; the belief in the same God; the possession of the same 
place of worship ; the common connection with the same priest- 
hood, together with the deference that was paid to the actual 
chief of the state. Besides all this, if it ever happened that any 
tribe persevered in a line of conduct injurious to the common 
interests, the other tribes then did not even hesitate to have 
recourse to arms in order to recall their misguided brethren to a 
sense of duty. (Jos. xxii, 34 ; Judg. xx, 1st and following verses.) 
Matters in which the common interests of all the tribes were in- 
volved were discussed in a general assembly or congregation of 
the chiefs, who were convoked by the president of the state, or 
judge, or in his defect, by the high priest. (Nurnb. x, 2-4; 
Judg. xx, 1 ; Josue, xxiii, 1, 2.) The place of meeting of the 
assembly was generally at the entrance to the Tabernacle. 
(Numb, x, 3; Judg. xx, 1; xxvii, 28; 1st Kings', x, 17.) 
Sometimes another place, distinguished by some remarkable 
event or circumstance would be selected. (Josue, xxiv, 1 ; 1st 
Kings, xi, 14, 15.) As long as the Hebrews sojourned in the 
desert, the assembly was convoked by the priests, by sound of 
trumpet ; but in Palestine it was necessary to employ heralds or 
couriers for the purpose, on account of the distance of the places 
where the people dwelt. It appears from Numbers (x, 4,) com- 
pared with Deuteron. (xxix, 9, 10,) and Judges (xv, 1, 2,) that 
there were two kinds of assemblies ; one to which only the 
princes of the tribes and heads of families were called ; the other 
to which, in addition to these, the genealogists (shoterim), the 
several judges, and sometimes at least, the people generally 
were invited. It appears, also, from Numbers (x, 4,) that when 
the first of these assemblies was to be convoked the silver trum- 
pets should be sounded but once ; from which it appears that to 
convoke an assembly of the second kind the trumpets should be 
at least twice sounded. It must be observed, however, that the 
princes of the tribes, together with the heads of families, repre- 
sented the whole people. These are called the elders of the 
people, the rulers of the congregation. (Exod., xix, 7; xxxiv, 31, 



298 



OF THE KINGS, THEIR 3HXISTEES, 



32.) That those had the representative character which we here 
attribute to them appears clearly from the examination of seve- 
ral places in Exodus and Leviticus. To this assembly Hoses 
communicated the commands of God, which were afterwards 
announced to the people by the proper officers. (Exod., xix, 7 ; 
Numb., ix, 25, 30.) In this assembly or senate war was pro- 
claimed — peace agreed upon — leagues sanctioned — the leaders 
in battle elected. The people, generally, submitted without 
murmuring to its acts and decrees : sometimes, however, they 
loudly expressed their dissatisfaction with its proceedings. (See 
Josue, ix, 18, 19.) Enough has been said of the Mosaic system 
of government to show, that the stability of the State was not 
necessarily bound up with the uninterrupted succession of those 
governors, who are styled judges in the scripture : nor need we 
be astonished to rind, that apparently the authority of some of 
these judges was recognised only by some of the tribes*. 



CHAPTER II. 

OF THE ETXOS, THEIR MINISTERS, AND THE OTHER MAGISTRATES 
OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE. 

¥e must here observe, in the first place, that the theocracy did not, 
by any means, cease with the introduction of the royal power. Du- 
ring the whole period of the existence of the Hebrew state, down to 
the departure of the sceptre from Jucla, God continued to govern the 
Israelites conformably to that stipulation, which he had announced 
to them by Moses. (Exod., xxix, 4, 5; xxiii, 20,33; Levit., xxvi, 3, 
46 ; Deuter., xxviii, 30.) This was, that they should enjoy prospe- 
rity as long as they would remain faithful to God, their King,; 
but that a departure from this fidelity should involve them in 
various troubles and calamities. Ey this fundamental principle 
must the entire history of the people of the Old Testament, in 
prosperity and adversity, be judged. From Josue to Samuel we 
find in the Eook of Judges, and the beginning of the first Eook 
of Kings, the record of the fulfilment of the promises and threats 
of God, according as the people were faithful or disobedient to 
His commandments. And when the presidency of Samuel gave 
way to the institution of the monarchy, the choice of the king 
was left to be determined by lot ; which meant that the selec- 
tion was referred to God, that thus all might know that God 
continued to be the king of the nation, and that he who was 
thus selected reigned merely as one who was in a very peculiar 
manner the vicegerent of God. Hence, the same rule in reference 
to the prosperity or adversity of the nation continued. And 



AJJD OTHEB MAGISTRATES, ETC. 



299 



whereas Saul failed to conduct himself as became his position, he 
was informed of the Divine decree by whioh the kingdom should 
be transferred to another family. (1st Kings, xiii, 5-14 ; xv, 1-31.) 
In fine, Samuel the prophet was commanded by God to designate 
David as king ; and thus again did God declare that to him, as 
in a special manner, king of the nation, it appertained to appoint 
that other king who should be His viceroy in its government. 
(1st Kings, xvi, 1-13.) The reign of David was prosperous, be- 
cause the people adhered firmly to God during that reign. After- 
wards, when Solomon departed from his duty to God, tumults 
arose : and throughout the books of Kings and Paralipomenon, 
we read of one calamity or another invariably following from 
infidelity to God's law. The prophets whom God sent in the 
time of the Kings unceasingly exhort the people to the obser- 
vance of the Divine commandments, and threaten them with exile 
from their country as a punishment for their continued disobe- 
dience. The people, not having repented, were accordingly car- 
ried away into captivity : and when they who had belonged to the 
kingdom of Juda returned to God in the days of their affliction, 
they were consoled with the assurance that they would soon be 
permitted to return to their own land. In a word, from the 
time of Moses until the Jews ceased to be the special people of 
God, we behold these two principles of the Jewish government 
in constant operation : first, That God should be in a particular 
manner the Icing of the Hebrew nation : and secondly, That obe- 
dience to his laws on the part of the nation should be rewarded with 
the public prosperity ; whilst disobedience to these laws should en- 
tail upon the State the most signal calamities. 

We proceed now to speak more particularly of these Hebrew 
kings ; having said enough to show that the theocracy did not 
cease with their introduction. 

First. — The inauguration of the kings was performed with 
various ceremonies, the principal of which was the anointing 
with the holy oil. This anointing was performed by the high 
priest, the minister of God ; hence, kings are so frequently 
styled in scripture the anointed of the Lord. The inaugu- 
ration of the kings of Israel differed in some points from 
that of the kings of Juda. It does not appear, for instance, 
that they received the unction with the holy oil ; as this 
oil was only kept in Jerusalem. We read of the prophets 
having sometimes privately anointed certain persons ; but this 
appears to have been merely a symbolical action by which the 
kingly dignity was promised to those persons. ( 1 st Kings, x, 1 ; 
xvi, 12, &c.) The ceremony of inauguration w T as performed by 
the high priest ; at first, in some public place, and at a later 



300 



OF THE KINGS, THEITt MINISTERS, 



period in the temple. The monarch became the anointed of the 
Lord as soon as the holy oil was poured upon his head. Then 
they put on him the diadem or crown, and gave him the 
sceptre. Then they read to him what is called the law of the 
kingdom — the duties which Hoses marked out for the chief of 
the state ; and they exacted from him an oath, that he would 
reign in a manner conformable to this law. The princes of the 
tribes then took an oath of obedience and fidelity to him, as well 
in their own name, as in the name of the people. Afterwards 
the king passed through the city, accompanied by his officers 
and the princes of the people, preceded by musicians, and followed 
by vast crowds of the populace, who rent the air with their ac- 
clamations. There are several allusions in the scripture to this 
triumphal procession. Finally, all the men of the kingdom 
accompanied the new king to his palace, where, being seated 
upon his throne, he received their congratulations. Such appears 
to have been the manner of proceeding at the inauguration of 
the kings ; as may be inferred from several references to the 
matter in the scripture, particularly in the book of Kings and 
Paralipomenon. However, in the installation of Saul several 
of these particulars appear to have been omitted. 

The chief distinctions of majesty mentioned in scripture are, 
the royal apparel, the throne, diadem, and sceptre. The ap- 
parel of the kings of the east was splendid, and their retinue 
numerous and magnificent. As purple and white were the most 
esteemed colours, it is likely that the Israelitic kings dressed in 
purple and fine white linen. The throne was an elevated seat, 
on which when the king sat, his feet rested upon a footstool. 
The throne was ascended by steps, and was usually highly orna- 
mented, as was the throne of Solomon. (3rd Kings, x, 18-20 ; 
2nd Paralip., ix, 17.) The diadem or crown was also rich and 
ornamented ; although at first it appears to have been merely a 
narrow fillet passing round the head. The sceptre, in very 
ancient times, was a spear or javelin, as Justin informs us, lib. 
xliii, c. 3: such was the sceptre of Saul. (1 Kings, xviii, 10 ; 
xxii, 6.) Afterwards it was a staff, made from the branch of 
some tree, and variously ornamented with gilding, rings, and 
nails of gold. 

The royal tulle was most sumptuously supplied, and numerous 
officers, attendants, and servants of the king were provided with 
food from the royal kitchen. Hence, what is stated in the 3rd 
Kings, iv, 22, 23— regarding the immense quantity of provisions 
daily consumed by the household of Solomon, need not surprise 
us. The vessels of the king's tables were numerous and costly 
— often of massive gold, (3rd Kings, x, 21,) especially at 



AND OTHER MAGISTRATES, ETC. 



301 



banquets, which were of frequent occurrence. Musicians 
attended at the royal feasts. It was only in Babylon that 
women were permitted to be present at, and partake of those 
.banquets with the men. In Persia the queen was present at 
the early part of the feast, until the men began to drink freely 
of wine. (Dan., v, 2, 3-23 ; Est, i, 9 ; v, 4-8 ; vii, 1.) These 
particulars are also attested by profane historians. As God was 
in a peculiar sense the king of the Hebrews — the peace-offerings 
held the place of his royal banquets. Hence, the people par- 
took of these, the king having first received his portion in some 
of the principal parts of the victim which were burned on the 
altar. Of course all was presented to Him in sacrifice ; and 
moreover the blood of the victim was poured out at the foot of 
the altar, so that the people might clearly understand that what 
they thus received was dispensed to them from the table of their 
Great King. 

The Hebrew kings doubtless observed great state : yet they 
they did not, for the most part, like the other monarchs of the 
east, withdraw themselves from the sight of their subjects. Far 
from punishing with death the person who presented himself 
before them without having been summoned, as was the case in 
Persia, (Esth., iv, 11,) they often threw open the gates of their 
palace to all, and gave audience to the most humble of their 
subjects. It was at the same time a mark of great favour, and 
the special privilege of the principal ministers of state, to be 
admitted at all times to see the face of the king. (2nd Kings, xiv, 
24-28-32 ; Prov. xxix, 26.) This happily illustrates what our 
Redeemer says in St. Matthew, (xviii, 10,) regarding the angels 
of the little ones, who always see the face of the Father who is in 
heaven. When the king went out from his palace he was always 
surrounded by a brilliant retinue : and when he visited the 
provinces a courier preceded him to apprise the people of his 
coming, so that they might be prepared to receive him in a 
suitable manner. Although royal chariots are sometimes men- 
tioned in the bible, it is nevertheless certain that the Hebrew 
kings most frequently made their journeys riding upon asses or 
mules. The royal palaces or gardens constituted no inconsiderable 
part of the magnificence of the kings ; to which we may add 
the royal sepulchres, which were hewn out of the solid rock. The 
kings were treated with great respect and veneration by the 
people : the names by which they were usually designated or 
addressed were Lord or Master, ()T1N) king, the anointed of the 
Lord. 

The duties of the king. — In the early times the kings were 
the leaders or generals in battle, the supreme judges of the 



302 



THE KINGS, THEIR 3IIXISTEES, 



people, and the high priests of the nation. (Gen. xiv, 18, 19.) 
Hence the same Hebrew word, c&hen, (?rD) is used to 
designate a priest, and the supreme civil magistrate. (Exod., ii, 
16 ; iii, 1.) But the king of the Hebrews could not arrogate to 
himself the sacred ministry which belonged to the tribe of Levi, 
and the family of Aaron. However, as vicegerent of God, who 
was properly the king of the Hebrews, (as we have explained 
already) it was his duty to take care that Divine worship should 
be strictly attended to according to the law. This duty was 
particularly well performed by the pious kings, David, Josaphat, 
Ezechias, and Josias. Among the Hebrews the duties of com- 
manding the army and of judging the people were performed 
either by the king in person, or by others deputed by him. The 
institution of Moses in regard to the inferior judges continued 
under the kings ; but it was the duty of the king to take care 
that none but persons properly qualified should be appointed to 
the office of judge. It was his duty, moreover, to receive and 
decide upon the appeals from the inferior tribunals. In this 
office he was to be assisted by the high priest. 

The rights of the Icings. — The Asiatic kings in general have 
from ancient times exercised an arbitrary and unlimited power 
over their subjects. In some of those countries, however, a 
limit was placed to the authority of the king : and among the 
Hebrews the regal power was defined and limited by the law 
of Moses. (Deut., xvii, 14-20.) Moreover, the chief men 
of the State, or nobles, retained considerable power even under 
the kings. Hence, in the case of Saul, and of David, we find 
the nobles laying down in writing the conditions upon which 
these kings were to govern : which conditions, upon their own 
part and the part of their successors, both Saul and David 
bound themselves by oath to observe. (1st Kings, x, 25; 2nd 
Kings, v, 3: Comp. 3rd Kings, xii, 1-18.) The prophets also, 
who were sent from time to time as legates of the Great King, 
opposed themselves to the abuse of the royal power — freely 
reprehending even kings themselves when they departed from 
the law of Moses. With all these safeguards against the abuse 
of royal authority, it was, notwithstanding, often greatly abused, 
as the history of the Old Testament abundantly proclaims. At 
the same time the legal rights of the Hebrew kings were very 
extensive. As vicegerents of Jehova they enjoyed the right of 
commanding and executing everything which conduced to the 
observance of the law of Moses, and of prohibiting everything 
that was opposed to that law. Hence, not only could they, like 
the judges in preceding times, issue commands, but they could, 
moreover, enact laws (2 Paralip. xix, 18 ; Isaias, x, 1) ; which, 



ASD OTHER MAGISTRATES, ETC. 



303 



however, were not immutable, like the law of the Persians. 
(Est., i, 19 ; Dan., vi, 16.) It is inferred from 2nd Kings, xiv, 
that they sometimes dispensed from the punishments decreed by 
the law of Moses : but this was a power which religious kings 
would rarely exercise. 

The revenues of the king. — It appears from the 1st Book of 
Kings, (xvii, 25,) that a certain fixed tribute was paid by the 
people towards the support of the king. Of the amount of this 
tribute no record has been preserved. It may hare been paid 
partly in money and partly in kind, viz., in cattle, corn, &c. It 
appears that this tribute was higher in amount, and consequently 
more oppressive under Solomon than it had been before. Hence, 
the people applied after his death for a diminution of the im- 
post : and the refusal of Eoboam to comply with their demands 
was the occasion of the schism of the ten tribes. (3rd Kings, xii, 
18 ; 2 Paralip. vvii, 5.) Besides this, the Hebrew kings had 
several other sources of revenue, as may be inferred from the 
usages which then prevailed in other eastern kingdoms, as well 
as from several references to the matter in scripture. First, 
there were spontaneous gifts on the part of the people. (1st 
Kings, x, 27 ; xvi, 20.) Second, the king's flocks. (1st Kings 3 
xxi, 7, 8; 2nd Kings, xiii, 23; 1 Paralip., xxvi, 10.) Third, 
royal farms, vineyards, and olive gardens. Fourth, the chief 
part of the spoils taken in war went to the king ; who, moreover, 
imposed tribute upon the conquered nations ; which tribute was 
also called a gift, and was paid partly in money, and partly in 
cuttle, sheep, and agricultural produce. (3rd Kings, v, 1.) 
Finally, there were the duties levied upon foreign merchants 
who passed through the kingdom. (3rd Kings, x, 15.) 

As to the ministers of the king : — 

First. — It is observed by Calmet that the sons of the king 
were often the chief ministers of state. The heir presumptive 
had many advantages over the rest of his brothers. Solomon, 
for instance, was placed upon the throne before the death of his 
father. And it is thought that other instances occurred, both in 
the kingdom of Jucla, and of Israel, in which the heir was 
associated to the royal dignity and office during the lifetime of 
his father. 

Second. — The Hebrew kings, like all the Eastern monarchs, 
had a very numerous court. lS"ow the first dignity of the palace 
was that of governor or master of the king" s house. (2 Paralip. 
xix, 11.) He was steward of the household, and had committed 
to him the charge of the servants, and indeed of everything 
which belonged to the palace. The peculiar marks of his dignity 
and office appear to have been — a key, which he carried on his 



304 OF THE KIXOS, THE IE MINISTERS, 

shoulder— a magnificent robe and girdle — the name of father of 
the house of Juda, and a distinguished place in the assemblies. 
(Isai. xxn, 21, 22.) 

Third. — Among the most important offices of the court was 
that of chancellor or remembrancer to the king, Mashir (TOTD). 
His principal duty appears to have been to arrange in order 
and preserve the state registers ; and to keepf'a diary of all the 
doings and occurrences in which the king was concerned. It is 
to such officers, probably, that after-times were indebted for that 
historical collection, which is so often referred to in scripture by 
the name of the' words of the days. 

Fourth. — The secretaries of the king are usually in the scrip- 
ture joined with the chancellors, of whom we have been 
speaking, There are three sorts of scribes or secretaries, 
Sopherim, (CHQD) known to the sacred volume : the first were 
simple notaries, who registered contracts, and other deeds apper- 
taining to the affairs of private persons. The second were the 
scribes, who copied and explained the scripture : these were the 
doctors of the law among the Hebrews. The third sort were the 
scribes or secretaries of the king, of whom there is question in 
this place. They wrote the ordinances, edicts, and letters patent 
of the king ; they kept the registers of his troops, cities, his 
revenue and expenditure. They resided at court : and it 
appears that it was in the apartment of the king's secretary that 
the principal officers of justice and police usually held their 
meetings. (Jerein. xxxvi, 12.) The book of Esther also speaks 
of the scribes of Assuerus, who wrote his ordinances and ^edicts, 
(iii, 12 ; vrfi 9.) 

Fifth. — We may justly place among the principal men of 
the kingdom, him who was styled the friend or companion of the 
king. AVith him the king familiarly conversed; and, moreover, 
he had sometimes confided to him a leading office in the govern- 
ment of the kingdom, or of the palace. (3rd Kings, iv, 5 ; 1 
Paralip. xxvi, 33.) ¥e learn from the first Eook of the!Macha- 
bees that this name of the king's friend came afterwards to 
signify that personage who was second in the kingdom — next 
after the king- — answering to the prime minister of state with 
us. (1 Macha., x, 65 ; xi, 26, 27.) 

Sixth. — The counsellors of the king are frequently mentioned 
in scripture. (3rd Kings, xii, 6-12 ; 1 Paralip. xxvii, 32 ; Isai., 
iii, 2, &c.) The name itself sufficiently indicates their office. 
Among them we may place the prophets ; ^hom it was customary 
with the pious kings to consult. (2nd Kings, vii, 2 ; 3rd Kings, 
xxii, 7, 8, &c.) On the other hand wicked and idolatrous kings, 
like the Pagan monarchs, took counsel with false prophets. The 



ATsV THE OTHER MAGISTRATES, ETC. 



305 



high priest is also reckoned among the royal counsellors (2nd 
Kings, viii, 17 ; 1 Paralip., xviii, 17 ; ) which was very congruous 
in a theocratical form of government. 

Seventh. — We may next mention among the ministers of the 
king, the superintendents of his lands and trees, of his vineyards 
and olive yards, of his flocks of cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and 
asses : to whom we may add the superintendents of the king's 
treasures or riches ; which, in the language of the Hebrews, mean 
the wine and oil laid up in the king's cellars, and the corn 
granaries of the king. 

Eighth. — Nor must we omit here to mention the collectors of 
the king's tribute. 

Mnth. — In the reign of Solomon mention is made of the 
officers of the king's table : these were twelve in number : one for 
each of the twelve cantons of the kingdom : and each, in his 
turn was bound to furnish from his canton all things required for 
the consumption of the king's table. It does not appear that the 
other kings who succeeded Solomon were in a condition to 
imitate his magnificence in this respect. 

Tenth. — Among the ministers of the king we may reckon the 
eunuchs, who had the superintendence of that part of the palace 
which was appropriated to the wives of the king. They had 
free access to the sovereign ; and often rose to situations of great 
dignity and trust in the state. The law of Moses having pro- 
hibited such mutilation, eunuchs were procured from other 
countries ; and at vast expense. They are frequently mentioned 
when there is question of the court ; whether it be of the kings 
of Israel, or of Juda. (3rd Kings, xxii, 9 ; 4th Kings, viii, 6 ; 
Jerem., xxxviii, 7.) 

Eleventh. — Lastly, the soldiers of the king's life-guard 
rendered important services to him. Their principal duty was 
to protect the person of the sovereign : besides this they appear 
to have been employed in executing summary justice on state 
criminals. In the time of David the royal life-guards were 
called Cerethites and Phelethites (2nd Kings, xx, 23) : concerning 
the origin of whose name commentators and critics are by no 
means agreed. In the Chaldee Targum on Second Kings they 
are termed " archers and slingers ;" and as the Hebrews were 
expert in the use of the bow and the sling it is not improbable 
that the royal guards were armed with them. The life* guards 
of the Asmonean princes, and subsequently of Herod and his 
sons, were foreigners : they bore a lance or long spear, called by 
the Eomans spiculum ; and hence they were denominated in 
Greek GKixovXaTugis. (Mark, vi, 27.) 

The other magistrates were — The princes of the tribes; the 

x 



306 



GOVERNMENT OF THE JEW& 



heads of families ; the genealogists, fshoterimj ; and judges : all 
of whom retained considerable authority, even in the time of the 
kings; and constituted the senate of the several cities of the 
kingdom. (3rd Kings, xii, 1, 24 ; 1 Paralip., xxiii, 4 ; xxvi, 29, 
&c.) However, as Jahn observes, the genealogists and judges 
were designated by the king in the same way as the other royal 
prefects. 



CHxiPTER III. 

CP THE GOVERNMENT OF THE JEWS, FROM THE TIME OF THE 
BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY TO THE STJBYEBSION OF THEIR CIVIL 
AND ECCLESIASTICAL POLITY. 

Pirst. — During the captivity the Hebrews retained their 
princes of tribes, and heads of families, by whom they were 
governed with a power subordinate to that of the royal prefects. 
(Ezech., xiv, I ; xx, 1 ; Esdras, i, 5 ; iv, 3 ; &c.) All the king- 
doms in which they (the Jews) dwelt, from the time of the over- 
throw of the kingdoms of Israel and Juda, down to the 
destruction of Jerusalem, appear to have indulged them thus far 
in their attachment to their ancient system of government. 
Besides the chiefs of tribes and families it appears highly 
probable that during the time of the Babylonian captivity, there 
was always some one Jewish prince whose authority was recog- 
nised by all the people ; we may fairly suppose that Jechonias 
was the first who held this authority : to him succeeded 
Salathiel ; who was again replaced by Zorobabel. In Egypt, 
also, there was a chief Jewish governor, as we may call him, 
who was styled Alabarch, or Ethnarch. In Syria, in like man- 
ner, the Jews were permitted to have their Archon, or president 
taken from their own body : and that the Pomans were disposed 
to indulge this people in the possession of a similar privilege 
appears from the fact that the Koman law, at the time of which 
we speak, allowed the Jews who were subject to Rome to sub- 
mit their disputes and lawsuits to Jewish arbitrators, whose 
sentence the Bornan officials were bound to execute. And since, 
in the time of St. Paul the Bornan authorities made no distinc- 
tion between Christians and Jews (Acts, xxiii, 24) ; hence, the 
apostle severely censures the Christians of Corinth for bringing 
their disputes before the pagan tribunals, instead of submitting 
them to arbitrators chosen from amongst themselves. (1 Cor., 
vi, 1-7.) (Jahn, Archceologia, sec. 233. Glaire, Introduce torn, 
ii, p. 529.) 

Second. — On the subversion of the Babylonian empire by 



GOVERNMENT OF THE JEWS. 



307 



Cyrus, the founder of the Persian monarchy, (b.c. 543,) this 
prince authorised the Jews hy an edict to return into their own 
country, with full permission to enjoy their laws and religion ; 
and he gave a decree for the rebuilding of the city and temple of 
Jerusalem. In conformity with this edict the Jews returned 
under Zorobabel, and the theocratic government which had been 
in abeyance was resumed.* At first, in the re-erection of the 
city and temple, and re-organisation of the state, the Jews had 
several difficulties to contend against ; the chief of which was 
the hostility of the Samaritans : but at length they triumphed 
over all these obstacles through the exertions of their pious 
governors, Esdras and Nehemias. After their death, the 
Jews were governed by their high priest; in subjection, how- 
ever, to the Persian kings, to whom they paid tribute. (1st 
Esdras, iv, 13 ; vii, 24.) At the same time this subjection to the 
Persian kings left them in the full enjoyment of their religious 
liberties : whilst it could be hardly said to have interfered with 
their civil freedom. Nearly three centuries of uninterrupted 
prosperity ensued, the privileges granted by the Persian kings 
being continued by Alexander the Great, and the various Grecian 
monarchs, his successors, to whom the Jews were subject. Then 
came the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, King of Syria, by whom 
they were most cruelly oppressed, and compelled to take up arms 
in their own defence. Owing to the valiant conduct of Judas 
Machabeus and his brothers, the Jews sustained a vigorous 
struggle for twenty-six years against five successive kings of 
Syria ; and at length succeeded in establishing their independence. 
Prom this period down, for the space of more than a hundred 
years, the family of the fMachabees gave rulers to the Jewish 
nation, who united in their own persons the regal and pontifical 
dignity. The downfall of the Machabean princes had its begin- 
ning in family disputes ; Hyrcanus the Second having been 

* We may observe here that it was only the kingdom of Juda that was 
recalled from captivity. The kingdom of Israel was never restored. Its 
overthrow was the work of the Assyrians, by whom its people were 
carried away captives. 

t As to the name Machabee, we may here observe that critics are by no 
means agreed upon its derivation. It is a very common opinion that it is 
formed from the four letters, M. C. B. I., which might have been dis- 
played upon the sacred standard of Judas ; and which were the initials of 
the words of the text, (Exodus, xv, 11,) Mi Camoka Beelim Jehova, nirv D*SttD 
»D — ''Who is like to thee among the strong (or among the gods), (J 
Jehova." In a similar way did the Romans, by the letters, S. P. Q. R. 
represent upon their standards the words, Senatus, Populus Que Romcmus. 
At the same time the name appears to have been given to J udas, son of 
Mattathias, before he engaged in any battle. This Judas was the first 



308 



GOVEK^MENT OF THE .JEWS. 



opposed by his brother, Aristobulus. Then the Eoraans, under 
Pompey, interfered ; defeated Aristobulus ; captured Jerusa- 
lem ; and reduced Judea to a tributary province of the Eepublic. 
(b.c. 59.) 

Third. — Julius Caesar, having defeated Pompey, continued 
Hyrcanus in the high priesthood ; but bestowed the government 
of Judea upon Antipater, an Idumean by birth, who was a 
Jewish proselyte. Alter Antipater, his son Herod, surnamed the 
Great, was enabled by the favour of the Eomans to obtain the 
government of the kingdom, together with the title of king. 
After Herod we find the government of some of the provinces of 
Palestine in the hands of tetrarchs. According to a very common 
opinion, the origin of the name and dignity of tetrarch is thus 
explained : when the Gauls, having made an irruption into Asia 
Minor, had obtained from the King of Eithynia that district 
which was afterwards called from them Galatia, they formed 
themselves into three divisions or tribes ; each of which was sub- 
divided into four cantons, or tetrarchates, under the government 
of their own tetrarchs: the tetrarchs themselves being subject 
to the king. The name tetrarch, therefore, properly designated 
the chief magistrate of the fourth part of a tribe or people ; who 
was himself subject to the king or emperor : but afterwards it 
was extended to other chief magistrates, who, with a like 
authority, governed any province or country; even though it 
might not be the fourth part of a tribe or people. Such tetrarchs 
were Herod Antipas, and Philip, sons of Herod the Great. 
(Matt., xiv, 1 ; Luke, ix, 7.) These, although in their respec- 
tive jurisdictions they acknowledged no superior but the emperor, 
were, nevertheless, inferior in dignity to the ethnarchs ; who, 
although they assumed not the name of the king, were yet 
honoured by their subjects with this appellation, and otherwise 
treated with the respect due to kings. Thus was Archelaus 
treated. He was the eldest son of Herod the Great, and Ethnarch 
of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. (Matt., ii, 22.) (Josephus, 
Antiq., xvii, 11.) 

Fourth. — Judeahaving been reduced to the form of a Roman pro- 
person who bore the name ; from him it passed to his brothers ; and was 
afterwards given to all those who, in the persecution of Antiochus 
Epiphanes, and the other Syrian kings, distinguished themselves, by their 
courage in the defence of their country, and of the holy law of God. In 
the latter times of their history, the Machabean rulers of Judea were 
better known by the appellation of the Asmonean, or Assamonean princes : 
a name which they derived from Asamoneub, the great grandfather of 
Mattathias ; as Josephus informs us, (Josephus, Antiq,, xii, 6. Calmet 
Diction, vv. Assqmonc&i et Machabm.\ 



aOYEE2s T MEXT OF THE JEWS. 



309 



vince, first after the ethnarchate of Archelaus, and subsequently 
after the reign of Herod Agrippa, it was governed by a procu- 
rator, who in the New Testament is called riysfioov (dux) pre- 
sident. By Josephus he is called znirgoxos, meaning the same as the 
Latin procurator. These governors were sometimes taken from 
the ranks of the Eoman knights ; sometimes from among the 
freedmen of the Emperor. Thus, Felix and Festus, mentioned 
in the Acts of the Apostles, were both freedmen of Caesar, by 
whom alone these prefects were named, and not by the senate ; 
for the Emperor reserved to himself the appointments to the 
government of the frontier provinces. The duty of the procura- 
tor was to collect the tribute, to administer justice, and quell 
revolts. Sometimes he was subject to the jurisdiction of the 
nearest proconsul. In this way was the authority of the pro- 
curator of Judea dependent on the proconsul of Syria. Notwith- 
standing this, there was great authority in the hands of the 
procurator : he even held the power of life and death. In Judea 
this governor had at his disposal six cohorts of soldiers, five of 
which remained at Csesarea, his usual residence; the sixth was 
stationed at Jerusalem, to which city the procurator went up at 
the time of the principal festivals, in order that he might the 
more readily take measures to quell any tumult which might 
arise. The Jews endured their subjection to the Eomans with 
great reluctance on- account of the tribute they were obliged to 
pay. In other respects, however, they enjoyed a large measure 
of national liberty, as appears from several passages of the New 
Testament, too numerous to quote here. To any one reading 
with attention this part of the sacred volume, it is quite manifest 
that the Jews had full permission to worship in the temple and 
the. synagogues — to practise their religious rites, and to live very 
much according to their own customs and laws. Thus they had 
their high priests, and council or senate ; they inflicted lesser 
punishments, they could apprehend culprits and bring them 
before the council, and if the aid of the Eoman soldiers was ne- 
cessary for this purpose, they could procure it by applying to the 
governor. Further, they could bind men and keep them in 
custody, and, in fine, they could investigate all infractions of the 
law, and examine witnesses in every case, but they could not 
proceed to the infliction of capital punishment. The power of 
life and death was no longer in their hands. This they testified 
themselves when they said to Pilate : It is not lawful for us to 
put any man to death. (John, xviii, 31.) In this state did the 
government of the Jewish nation continue until that fatal war 
with the Eomans, which ended in the destruction of the temple 
and city of Jerusalem, and the supervision of their civil and 
ecclesiastical policy. 



310 



OF THE COURTS OF JUDICATURE 



CHAPTEK IV. 

OF THE COURTS OF JUDICATURE AND LEG-AL PROCEEDINGS MENTIONED 
IN THE SCRIPTURE. 

I. — Of the Hebrew courts of judicature ; — 

First. — According to the laws of Moses, each city and town 
was to have its judges, whose jurisdiction should extend also to 
the surrounding villages. (Deuter., xvi, 18.) From the decision 
of these, an appeal lay to the principal judge or chief of the state 
assisted by the high priest, as we have already more than once 
explained. To this superior tribunal, serious cases might be re- 
ferred even in the first instance. This state of things was 
re-established on the return from the captivity, and continued 
unaltered even until the time of the Machabees, when a supreme 
tribunal was instituted, of which we first find mention made 
under Hyrcanus the Second, and which notwithstanding all that 
the rabbins say to the contrary, had nothing in common with the 
council of the ancients of Israel, established by God to assist 
Moses in the government of the people. After the institution 
of the great council in the time of the Machabees, the tribunals 
established by Moses in the several cities and towns still con- 
tinued. This appears from the testimony of Josephus, who says 
they existed in his own time. {On the Jewish War, Book ii, xx, 
§ 5.) He says that the regular number of judges for each of 
these local tribunals was seven, and that to each tribunal two 
officers were assigned out of the tribe of Levi. (Antiq., iv, 14.) 

Second. — As we observed above, there was instituted in the 
time of the Machabees the great council or Synedrium, called by 
the Talmudists, Sanhedrin. It consisted of seventy-two judges. 
The president of it was always the high priest. We are informed 
by the Talmudists that it had two vice-presidents, one of whom 
sat on the right hand of the president, the other on his left. 
The assessors were : 1st, the chief priests, by whom we are to 
understand those who had enjoyed the dignity of high priest, as 
well as the heads of the twenty-four classes into which the priests 
were distributed ; 2nd, the elders, by whom are meant the chiefs 
of tribes and heads of families ; 3rd, the scribes, or doctors of the 
law. However, not all the scribes nor all the elders were mem- 
bers of the Sanhedrin, but those only among them who had 
obtained this dignity by election, or the nomination of the prince 
or chief governor of the state. To this tribunal were brought 



AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, ETC. 



311 



appeals from the other courts, and to it belonged to decide in the 
first instance upon those weighty causes which affected the 
general interests of the state or of religion. 

Third. — As to the other tribunals which existed in the time 
of our Eedeemer, the Talmudists inform us that there was one 
consisting of twenty-three judges, which took cognizance of 
capital cases in which the general interests of the state or of 
religion were not involved ; it was of course inferior to the San- 
hedrin, and many commentators suppose that to it our Eedeemer 
alludes by the name of the judgment. (Matt., v, 22.) Jahn is of 
opinion that this tribunal of twenty-three judges was no other 
than the tribunal of each synagogue, to which there is reference 
in John, vii, 2, and 2 Corinth., xi, 24 ; and which treated ex- 
clusively of cases in which religious questions were involved, with 
the power merely of inflicting the punishment of thirty-nine 
stripes. (Jahn, Archceol. Bibti., § 239.) The Talmudists further 
inform us that there was in these later times of which we are 
speaking, another tribunal consisting of but three judges, to 
which matters of slight importance were referred. Jahn, how- 
ever, well observes in the place above quoted, that these were 
really the courts of arbitration before which the Romans per- 
mitted the Jews to carry their disputes. This character of 
the tribunal in question sufficiently appears from what the 
Talmudists say regarding it, viz., that one of the judges was 
chosen by the plaintiff, another by the defendant, and the third 
by both. As we have seen already, the Christians even in the 
time of St. Paul enjoyed the privilege of bringing their disputes 
before a similar tribunal, because at that time the Eoman law 
made no distinction between Christians and Jews. AVith respect 
to the Jewish tribunals in general, we may observe, that under 
the Roman government their power of inflicting punishment was 
to a great extent withdrawn. However, they retained still the 
right of pronouncing sentence, but for the execution of the sen- 
tence they should have recourse to the Roman procurator. AYe 
may observe, moreover, that throughout the entire time during 
which the Jews continued to be a nation, the elders (seniores) 
enjoyed great authority among the people. These were the 
chiefs of the tribes, and the heads of the several families into 
which each tribe was divided. These elders are often mentioned 
in the New Testament, but it does not appear that at that period 
they had any authority distinct from that which belonged to 
them as members of the Sanhedrin or some of the other tribunals 
already mentioned. 

Fourth.- — The Roman tribunals mentioned in the New Testa- 
ment are : 1 st, the provincial tribunal, or the court of the Roman 



312 



Or THE COrETS OF JTDICATrEE 



procurator. 2nd — The tribunal of the Emperor, or of Caesar ; 
to which a Roman citizen had the right to bring his causes 
by appeal from the provincial authority : hence, we find in the 
Acts of the Apostles, that St. Paul as a Roman citizen exercised 
this right. 

Fifth. — The Areopagus was an Athenian tribunal, which, in 
the time of St. Paul, held permission from the Roman government 
to continue its sittings and the exercise of the functions for which 
it was originally instituted. It is said to have been instituted by 
Cecrops, the founder of the city of Athens : and was celebrated 
for the strict equity of its decisions. Among the various causes 
of which it took cognizance, were matters of religion ; the conse- 
cration of new gods ; erection of temples and altars ; and the 
introduction of new ceremonies into divine worship. Hence, St. 
Paul as a preacher of a new religion was brought before it. 
(Acts, xvii, 18. ) Its sittings were held on the Apsiog *ayos or Sill 
of Mars (whence its name was derived) ; an insulated precipitous 
rock, standing in the midst of the city of Athens. 

Noio as to legal proceedings : 

We may first, however, premise a few words respecting the 
time and place of the trial of causes : and, first, of the time. It 
was in the forenoon or early part of the day that causes were to 
be tried. (Jerern., xxi, 12; Ps. c, 8.) The Talmudists will not 
allow capital cases to be tried at night. They also pronounce it 
to be unlawful to examine the case, to pronounce sentence, and 
to execute it all on the same day : they prescribe that the 
execution of the sentence at least, be put off till the following 
day. All these regulations were neglected in the tumultuous 
trial of our Divine Redeemer. (Alatt., xxvi, 57 ; John, xviii, 
13-18.) The Talmud in several places prohibits the trying causes 
on festival days : but Jahn shows very well that there was no 
warrant in the law for such a prohibition. — Jahn, Archaolog. 
§ 240. 

Second. — As to the place of trials, we find that in the earlier 
times causes were heard and decided at the gates of the cities, 
where there was a place prepared for the purpose. Thus great 
publicity was given to the trials, inasmuch as there would be 
many persons constantly entering and leaving the city by the 
gates ; and, moreover, many would assemble there for the purpose 
of passing away the time, or of attending the public market, 
which was usually held in the same place. Among the Greeks 
and Romans we find that the ayo^a, thefonc/n, where causes were 
heard and decided, was also the market place. 

Third. — As to the manner and form of trials. — In the early 
times judgments were everywhere summary, except in Egypt, 



AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, ETC. 813 

where the plaintiff stated his cause in writing, and the defendant 
replied also in writing; then the plaintiff rejoined, and lastly the 
defendant put in an answer to the rejoinder. (Diodorus Sic. 
Book I, section 75; comp. Job, xiv, 17; and xxxi, 25.) In 
Egypt, moreover, the judge kept always before him the book of 
the laws, which is still usual in the East. (Comp. Dan., vii, 10.) 
The Mosaic law did not change the summary form of trial: but 
the people are frequently reminded that the civil tribunal is the 
judgment-seat of God, and that, therefore, all partiality is to be 
banished from it. The judges, moreover, are severely prohibited 
from receiving gifts. (Exocl., xxii, 20, 21 ; xxiii, 1-9; Lev., xix, 
15; Deut., xxiv, 14, 15.) It was also provided that capital or 
corporal punishments of any kind should not be extended beyond 
the guilty party to his parents or children ; as was the case in 
other nations. (Exod., xxiii, 7 ; Deut., xxiv, 16 ; comp. Dan., vi, 
25.) This most salutary law appears to have been neglected 
afterwards by the kings, (4th Kings, ix, 26,) although in 
other respects the form of trial was observed, even when the 
known innocence of the person did not preserve him from the 
persecution of the sovereign. (3rd Kings, xxi, 7-16.) The 
judges were easily induced to imitate the evil example of the 
king ; and hence, such frequent complaints on the part of the 
prophets against iniquity in the judgment-seat. As to the form 
of trial among the Jews, the following particulars are all that 
are now known to us. Eirst — The accuser and accused, or, as 
we say, the plaintiff and defendant, presented themselves 
before the judge or judges. (Deut., xxv, 1.) There was present 
at least in the latter times of the Jewish kingdom, a notary, who, 
as is still practised in the East, wrote the sentence, and other 
acts, such as contracts. (Isaias, x, 1, 2; Jerem., xxxii, 1-14.) 
The Jews assert that the president of the Sanhedrin was attended 
by two notaries, one of whom stood at his right hand, and wrote 
the sentence of acquittal ; the other at his left, to whom it 
belonged to write the sentence of condemnation. Of course the 
judges had always at hand inferior officers to execute their 
orders, either in apprehending and bringing to trial the accused 
party, or in seeing that the awarded punishment was inflicted on 
the condemned. Second — The plaintiff and defendant stood; 
the plaintiff on the defendant's right hand. The plaintiff was 
called satan, that is adversary. (Zach., iii, 1-3.) Third — The 
case was usually tried by sworn witnesses. Even the plaintiff 
and the defendant might be compelled by the judge to swear. 
(Jos., iii, 19 ; 1st Kings, xiv, 37-40; Matt., xxvi, 63.) At least 
two witnesses, or when the plaintiff was counted, three were 
required ; who gave their testimony separately, but each in the 



314 



OF THE CRLMTXAL LAW 



presence of the accused. (Xunib., xxxv, 30 ; Deut., xvii, 1-15 ; 
Matt., xxvi, 69.) Proofs were also put in, deduced from other 
documents, such as contracts of sale and purchase ; of which two 
copies were taken — one sealed, and the other open — as was 
still the custom among the people of Palestine, even in the time 
of St. Jerome. (Jerem., xxxii, 10-13.) That recourse was had 
sometimes to the lot, in trials, appears from Prov., xviii, 18 ; but 
this, doubtless, was only when the plaintiff and defendant gave 
their consent. The sacred lot, or TJrim and Thummim, was 
formerly applied also to the purpose of discovering criminals. 
(Jos., vii, 14-24 ; 1st Kings, xiv, 42.) The sentence was pro- 
nounced immediately after trial, and executed without delay, 
even in capital cases. (Jos., vii, 22 ; and 1st Kings, xxii, 18 ; 
3rd Kings, ii, 23.) 



CHAPTEE Y. 

OF THE CKIMINAL LAW OF THE JEWS. 

At the period when the Mosaic law was introduced, crime 
abounded to an enormous extent among the surrounding nations ; 
and hence this law is so particular in pointing out the several 
crimes which the .Jews should avoid under the most severe 
penalties. We shall treat of these briefly under the several 
heads of — first, crimes against God; second, crimes against 
parents and rulers ; third, crimes against property ; fourth, 
crimes against the person ; fifth, crimes of malice. 
I. — The crimes against God are : — 

First. — Idolatry, which consists in the worship of false gods. 
This was not only a most heinous sin against God, but, moreover, 
considering the theocratical form of the Jewish government, it 
was a transgression against a fundamental law of the state, and 
a crime of high treason against the prince. It was capitallv 
punished by stoning the guilty person. According to the Mosaic 
law, when a whole city became guilty of idolatry, it was to be 
treated as in a state of rebellion against the government, and 
visited with total extermination both of the inhabitants and of 
the city itself. (Deut., xiii, 13-18.) These laws against idolatry 
were by no means well enforced afterwards, and when by the 
negligence of the magistrates idolatry passed from one city to 
another, until at length it invaded the people as a nation, then 
God himself inflicted punishment for the crime by means of war, 
famine, and other national calamities. 



OF THE JEWS. 



315 



Second. — Blasphemy, or the use of language injurious to God, 
or His attributes, was a high crime against God and against the 
state in its chief ruler. It was punished capitally by stoning. 
(Levit., xxiv, 10-14.) Those who heard the blasphemy uttered, 
were to put their hands on the head of the blasphemer, who 
should then be taken to a place without the city and put to 
death. 

Third. — Falsely prophesying. — This crime was also prohi- 
bited under the penalty of death by stoning. (Deut., xviii, 
20-22.) There were two cases in which the penalty was in- 
curred ; first, if the person prophesied in the name of any false 
god, he was to be stoned whether the event took place or not. 
(Deut., xiii, 2-6.) Secondly, if a person foretold anything in the 
name of the true God, then it was necessary to wait until the 
time fixed for the fulfilment of the prediction, and in the mean 
time the prophet could not be molested, even should he have 
foretold calamity or destruction to the state : but when the time 
fixed for the fulfilment of the prediction came, if the event did 
not then take place, the prophet was to be treated as an impostor 
and stoned. (Deut., xviii, 21, 22.) 

Fourth. — Divination is a species of superstition which consists 
in conjecturing future events from certain things which are sup- 
posed to presage them, but which have no natural connexion 
with the event. All kinds of divination are expressly prohibited 
in the law. (Lev., xix, 26-31 ; xx, 6, 23, 27 ; Deut., xviii, 
9-12.) The means sanctioned by the law for learning what* was 
to happen at a future time were — to consult God by a prophet, 
or by the sacred lot kept by the high priest (the Uriin and 
Thummim.) God reserves to himself the punishment of the 
person who would consult a diviner. He declares that He will 
set His face against that soul, and destroy it out of the m idst of its 
people. (Lev., xx, 6.) The person who professed the art of 
divining, whether man or woman, was to be stoned. (Lev., xx, 
27.) 

Fifth. — Perjury is severely denounced in the Mosaic law as a 
most heinous sin against God. Calmet (Dictio v. Perjurium) 
infers from the expressions of the law that the person who would 
be convicted of having sworn falsely in a court of justice, or in 
any public place, was to be punished with death, although the 
kind of death is not specified. 

II. — Crimes against Parents and Rulers : 

First. — The parental authority was most jealously guarded 
by the law of Moses. The cursing of parents, by which is 
meant not only the imprecation of evil upon them, but also 
aR injurious and reproachful language towards them, was 



316 



OP THE CRIMINAL LAW 



punished with death (Exod., xxi, 17 ; Levit., xx, 9) ; as like- 
wise was the striking of them. (Exod., xxi, 15.) 

Second. — To speak ill of the prince of the people, of judges, 
and of magistrates, or to use injurious or reproachful language 
towards them, is expressly prohibited in Exodus, (xxii, 28,) no 
punishment is specified. It was probably left to the discretion 
of the judge, and was, it is to be supposed, different, according 
to the rank of the magistrate and the extent of the crime. 

III. — Crimes against Property : 

Eirst. — The crime of theft was punished in the Mosaic law 
by a double restitution, and in some cases by a higher amount ; 
thus the person who stole a sheep, and had alienated or slaughtered 
it, was bound to restore four-fold ; for an ox, in a similar case 
the restitution should be five-fold on account of the great utility 
of the ox in agriculture. But in either case, if the animal were 
found alive in the hands of the thief, he was bound only to the 
twofold restitution. (Exod., xxii, 1, 4.) A thief who would be 
found breaking into a house by night might be killed, but not if 
the sun had arisen. (Exod., xxii, 2.) The apprehended danger to 
life in the first case, and not in the second, appears to be the 
ground on which the law was based. If a thief were found 
unable to make restitution for the property stolen, he could be 
sold as a slave (Exod., xxii, 3) ; and even, if necessary, his wife 
and children could be sold also. 

Man stealing, by which is meant in the law of Moses, the 
seizing or stealing of a freeborn Israelite for the purpose of 
making him a slave, or selling him as such, was punished with 
death. (Exod., xxi, 16; Deut., xxiv, 7.) 

The mode of procedure respecting debtors, sanctioned by the 
Mosaic law, was at once simple and efiicient. 

First. — The creditor could secure the payment of the debt 
by means of a pledge or mortgage, or of a surety or bondsman. 
Second. — The creditor, however, was not permitted to enter the 
house of the debtor and take away in pledge whatever he pleased, 
but was bound to wait at the door of the house until the debtor 
gave up to him some article which he could most conveniently 
spare. (Deut., xxiv, 10, 11; compare Job, xxii, 6.) Third. — 
If the creditor received in pledge a mill, or millstone, or the 
outer garment or cloak, he was not allowed to retain any of these 
during the night. These things are mentioned as an example, 
whence it was to be inferred that the same law applied to all 
other things with which the debtor could not easily dispense. 
(Exod., xxii, 25, 26 ; Deut., xxiv, 6-12.) Eourth.— Debts could 
not be exacted in the seventh or Sabbatical year, because that 
was a year of rest for the land, and hence the debtor was not 



OF THE JEWS. 



317 



supposed to have in his hands the means of making payment, 
wherefore this year had also the name of remission, which does 
not mean that the debt was extinguished, but that a delay . for 
that year was allowed by the law. (Deut., xy, 1-11.) At other 
times if a debtor was incapable of paying, his house and land 
might be transferred to the creditor, who could enjoy the pro- 
duce of the land until the debt was paid, or at least until the 
year of jubilee, for the lands of the Jews could not be sold in 
perpetuity ; houses, however, could, with the exception of those 
belonging to the Levites. (Levit., xxv, 14-32.) If the property 
of the debtor was inadequate to the payment of the debt, he 
could be sold into slavery, and even his wife and children. 
(Prov., xxii, 27 ; Mich., xi, 9.) The law of Moses did not pro- 
vide that debts should be extinguished, either in the Sabbatical 
year, or the year of Jubilee. If Josephus testifies that debts 
were cancelled in the year of Jubilee, (Antiq., iii, c. 12, sec. 1,) 
he speaks only of his own times. It does not appear that 
imprisonment for debt existed in the earlier period of the 
Jewish commonwealth, but it seems to have prevailed in the 
time of Christ. (Matt., xviii, 34.) 

Fifth. — The surety or bondsman for an other was liable to 
be compelled to the payment of the debt by the same means 
as the debtor himself. (Prov., vi, 1-4; xi, 15; xvii, 18; xxii, 
26.) The formality by which one became bondsman lor another 
appears to have consisted in giving the hand to the debtor in 
presence of the creditor; hence these places of the book of 
Proverbs just now quoted contain a warning against giving the 
hand in this way, and thus making oneself liable for the debts 
of another. 

As to usury, not only was it most strictly prohibited to the 
Jewish people, in the law of Moses, to take usury from the poor 
among their brethren, (Exod., xxii, 24; Levit., xxv, 35-37, 
but, moreover, they were not permitted to take it from any 
Israelite. (Deut., xxiii, 20, 21.) From strangers they could 
receive it. Several theologians, with St. Thomas, explain this 
permission in reference to strangers, as a permission of a lesser 
evil in order to avoid a greater, viz., the oppression of the 
Jewish people by the usurious exactions of their brethren. 
Others say that the Jews could take without any sin this usury 
from the stranger : but by strangers these interpreters under- 
stand the enemies of the Jews, who lived in their neighbourhood, 
viz., the Chanaanites, the Amorrhites, and Amalekites : and 
they say that as the Jews had full permission from God to 
despoil these of all their goods in war, and even put them 
to death in battle without any sin, it is not wonderful that 



318 



OE THE CRIMINAL LAW 



they should have had permission to take their money in usury 
without sin. 

IV. Crimes against the person. 

First. — Murder, in the Mosaic law, had the punishment of 
death decreed against it, without any power of redemption. The 
mode of inflicting death on murderers is undetermined in the 
law. It belonged to the next of kin to the murdered person to 
execute the sentence on the murderer. The next of kin is 
called the btfS {Goel) or avenger of blood. 

Second. — For homicide or manslaughter, as distinguished from 
murder, the Mosaic law provided cities of refuge, to which the 
person who had committed the homicide could have recourse, 
and in some one of which he was bound to reside until the death 
of the high priest. If the Goel or Avenger of Blood overtook 
the homicide before he reached a city of refuge and put him to 
death ; or, if finding him outside of his asylum during the life- 
time of the High Priest he put him to death ; in neither case 
was the Goel liable to any legal punishment. The cities of refuge 
were six in number, and were conveniently situated in the 
several districts of the country, so as to be of easy access to all. 

In the case of a slave not of Hebrew descent — if a man had 
struck any such person, being his slave, with a stick so as to 
cause death, unless that event took place without delay he was 
not punished. If the slave survived one or two days the master 
escaped with impunity, it being considered that his death might 
not have proceeded from the beating, and that the presumption 
was that a master would not wilfully kill any of his slaves, as 
that would be against his own interest ; because, as Moses says, 
" They are his money." (Exod., xxi, 20, 21.) If the slave did 
not survive for a day, his death was to be avenged, but in what 
manner Moses has not specified. 

Third. — If a person were found murdered in a field or on the 
highway, and that the murderer could not be discovered, then the 
elders and judges of the neighbouring cities were to go out and 
learn by exact measurement what city stood nearest to the dead 
body ; the elders of that city were then called upon to go through 
a solemn ceremony described in the law, and to declare in the 
presence of the priests that they neither committed the murder 
themselves, nor had been witnesses of its commission. (Deut., 
xxi, 1-9.) 

Fourth. — Other corporal injuries which stopped short of the 
death of the injured party, had all their appropriate punishments 
assigned to them in the law of Moses. If one struck another in 
a quarrel or frag so that the person struck should be confined to 
his bed, the culpable party was obliged to indemnify him for the 



OF THE JEWS. 



319 



loss of his time and the expenses incurred for his cure. (Exod., 
xxi, 18, 19.) If anyone deliberately, or with premeditated de- 
sign, injured another in any member, then the law of retaliation 
was to be enforced against him, so that not only life was to be 
paid for by life, but also an eye was to be paid for by an eye, a 
tooth by a tooth, a foot by a foot, a hand by a hand, a wound 
by a wound, bruising by bruising. (Exod., xxi, 23-25; Lev,, 
xxiv, 10-22.) We must observe that this law of retalia- 
tion was not left in the hands of private persons, so that they 
might take vengeance according to it without having recourse to 
the judge. Moreover, either before or after the sentence of the 
judge, the injured party could accept a sum of money in lieu of 
punishment. This law, most just in itself, and sanctioned by 
the usage of all ancient nations, was a most efficacious means of 
deterring from injuries to the neighbour. The arguments which 
have been urged against this law have no weight. If it be said 
that by means of it the number of mutilated persons would be 
multiplied in the country, we answer that it would have a con- 
trary effect by deterring efficaciously from such injuries. Again, 
if it be said that often the sentence of the judge would inflict a 
greater evil on the accused party than the other had sustained — 
as, for example, if a man who through some accident had been 
deprived of one of his eyes, afterwards culpably put out the eye 
of another person, then if such a one were to pay an eye for an 
eye, he would sustain a much greater evil than he inflicted — we 
answer, that in such cases it was the duty of the judge so to 
modify the letter of the law preserving its spirit as to guard 
against such a consequence. The law of retaliation did not 
extend to the case of an injury done by a man to his slave, but 
if a master knocked out the eye or tooth of a slave, the latter re- 
ceived his freedom as a compensation for the injury which he 
had sustained. (Exod., xxii, 26, 27.) 

If a pregnant woman was hurt in consequence of an affray 
between two individuals — in case of a premature delivery, the 
author of the misfortune was obliged to give to her husband such 
a pecuniary compensation as he might demand : the amount of 
which, if the offender thought it too high, was to be deter- 
mined by the decision of arbiters. On the other hand, if either 
the woman or her child was hurt or maimed, the law of retalia- 
tion took its full effect. (Exod., xx, 22 ; &c.) 

Fifth. — Crimes of last were all most severely punished by 
the Mosaic law, as we learn from several parts of Leviticus and 
Deuteronomy ; suffice it here to say, that adultery and the 
abominations so common among the Egyptians and Chanaanites, 
were punished with death by the law of Moses. 



320 



OF THE PUNISHMENTS MENTIONED 



V. — As regards crimes of malice, the Mosaic law first ex- 
pressly prohibited the publication of false reports affecting the 
character of others, (^Exod., xxiii, 1,) although this statute does 
not annex any punishment to the crime. Secondly, whoever had 
been convicted of having given false testimony against another, 
was punished according to the law of retaliation, without the 
possibility of reprieve, so that the very same punishment was 
inflicted on him which attended the crime of which he had 
accused his innocent brother. (Deut., xix, 16-21.) 



CHAPTEE VI. 

OF THE PUNISHMENTS MENTIONED IN THE SCEIPTUEE. 

And first of capital punishments. These are : 

First. — Slaying with the Sword. — This was among the Jews 
a very ordinary mode of inflicting the punishment of death, as 
may be learned from several passages of the Scripture. (Judg., 
viii, 21 ; 1st Kings, xxii, 18 ; 2nd Kings, i, 15 ; &c.) 

Second. — Ston ing is also one of the modes of inflicting capital 
punishment determined by the law of Moses. It is thought that 
Moses followed an ancient usage, when he prescribed that the 
witnesses should cast the first stones at the guilty party, and 
that then the entire people should take part in the stoning. 
(Deuter., xiii, 10 ; xvii, 7 ; Josue, vii, 25 ; John, viii, 7.) Stoning 
was indeed an Egyptian custom. (Exod., viii, 26.) Wherever, in 
the law of Moses the kind of death is not fixed, stoning is to be 
understood ; and therefore it is to be understood in Lev., xx, 10 ; 
Deut., xxiii, 22 ; where there is question of the crime of adultery; 
and this appears from Ezech., xvi, 38-40 ; John, viii, 5 : compare 
also Exod., xxxi, 14, and xxxv, 2, with lumbers, xv, 35, 36. 

Third. — Burning to death is a punishment decreed by Moses 
against the daughters of priests who would be guilty of forni- 
cation, (Lev., xxi, 9,) and against a man who would marry both 
the mother and the daughter, Levit., xx, 14.) This kind of 
punishment seems to have been usual in the East — hence, we 
find it practised by the Babylonians or Chaldeans. (Jereni., xxix, 
22 ; Dan., iii, 6.) 

Eourth. — Decapitation : This manner of inflicting death was 
in use among the Egyptians. (Gen. xl, 17-19.) Hence, it was 
known to the Hebrews ; and in the latter times of the Jewish 
state, the kings — particularly Herod and his descendants — not 
unfrequently sentenced condemned persons to this kind of death. 



TN THE SCRTPTUE.E. 



821 



(Matt., xiv, 8-12; Acts, xii, 2.) It is not, however, included 
among the kinds of punishment fixed by the law of Moses. 

'Fifth..— Precipitation, or casting headlong from a precipice 
or some elevated place, was a punishment in frequent use among 
ancient nations. The practice of it among the Eomans is well 
known ; who used to throw certain malefactors from the Tarpeian 
rock. It is sometimes mentioned in the scripture : thus Jezabel 
the wife of Achab, was precipitated from a window. (4th 
Kings, ix, 30-33.) The Jews attempted to precipitate our 
Divine Eedeemer from the brow of a mountain. (Luke, iv, 29.) 

Sixth. — Drowning was a punishment in use among the 
Syrians, and was known to the Jews in the time of oar Saviour; 
though we have no evidence that it was practised by them. To 
this mode of capital punishment does our Divine Eedeemer allude 
in Matthew, xviii, 6. 

Seventh. — Bruising or pounding in a mortar is a punishment 
still in use among the Turks. Although there is no proof that 
it was ever practised by the Jews, yet it was not unknown in 
the time of Solomon, as we see by his allusion to it in Pro- 
verbs, xxvii, 22. 

Eighth. — Dichotomy or cutting asunder was one of the capital 
punishments anciently in use, in the countries contiguous to 
Judea. According to the tradition of the Jews, the prophet 
Isaias was subjected to this manner of death by King Manasses : 
to this St. Paul is supposed to allude in Hebrews, (xi, 37.) 

Ninth. — Beating to death. The TvpnaviGfLos, was a punish- 
ment in use among the Greeks. Antiochus Epiphanes practised 
it in his persecution of the Jews ; as we see by the Second Book 
of Machabees vi, 29, (in the Greek.) AYe see in the Greek of 
St. Paul to the Hebrews, xi, 35, a reference to the same manner 
of death, where the Apostle had in view that part of the Second 
Machabees to which we have referred. In the Latin Yulgate 
St. Paul's words are translated alii distenti sunt. There are 
various opinions about the precise nature of the Tu/&<?ravt<rfio£. It 
consisted, most probably, in beating to death with sticks. The 
person condemned to suffer, this kind of death was stretched at 
full length, and thus received the strokes of the executioner. 
(See Calmet, Dictionar. v. Tympanum.) 

Tenth. — Exposing to toild beasts. The punishment of casting 
into the lion's den appears to have been practised among the 
Medes and Persians. We read that it was inflicted on the holy 
prophet Daniel, who was miraculously preserved ; and afterwards 
on his accusers, who miserably perished. (Daa. vi, 7-12 ; 16-24.) 
Among the Eomans exposure to wild beasts was practised in two 
ways, as an amusement for the people in the theatres. Some- 

y 



322 



OP THE PUNISHMENTS MENTIONED 



tiroes men were cast naked to the wild beasts, to be devoured by 
them. Sometimes persons were sent into the theatre armed, to 
right with wild beasts : if they conquered they had their lives 
and liberties : but if not they fell a prey to the beasts. To this 
latter usage St Paul refers in 2 Tim., iv, 17, and 1 Corinth., xv, 
32. 

Eleventh.— Crucifixion was a punishment in use among the 
Persians, Carthaginians, and Eomans. The Jewish kings of the 
Asmonean family adopted the practice from the Eomans. Our 
Divine Eedeemer, at the urgent demand of the wretched Jewish 
people, was subjected to this manner of death by the Eoman 
governor ; and therefore we shall enter into somewhat fuller 
details respecting the nature of it. This penalty was reserved by 
the Eomans for wicked slaves, robbers, assassins, and seditious 
persons. In this latter class the Jews reckoned our Saviour ; 
alleging as their reason that He called himself king. (Luke, 
xxiii, 2.) When the sentence was passed, Ibis ad crucem, the 
condemned person was stript of all his garments and bound to a 
low stake : here he was scourged, sometimes with rods, but 
generally with thongs ; and in so cruel a manner that several 
died under the strokes. Our Divine Eedeemer was moreover, 
crowned with thorns and mocked ; but this did not belong to the 
punishment of the cross. In our Eedeemer's case it is to be 
ascribed to the gratuitous insolence of the Eoman soldiers. 
(Matt., xxvii, 29 ; Mark, xv, 17 ; John, xix, 2, 5.) Eegularly 
when the condemned person had been scourged, he was obliged 
immediately to drag his cross to the place of execution ; which 
was generally some elevated spot without the limits of the city, 
and near the public road. The cross, which was called infame 
lignum, infelix lignum, was formed of a perpendicular beam, 
crossed by another at right angles, so as to resemble the letter 
T — at least very nearly : because upon a portion of the perpen- 
dicular beam, where it slightly overtopped the transverse one, 
there was attached a statement of the culprit's crime. There 
also projected from the perpendicular beam a piece of wood on 
which the person sat, as on a kind of saddle, and by which the 
whole body was supported. This was called in Greek Uny^a. 
It is mentioned by St. Ireneus. {Adv. Seer., ii, 42.) Having 
come to the place of execution, it appears that more commonly 
the cross was fixed in its place first, and then the condemned 
person, after being stript naked, was raised up so as to rest on 
the piece of wood : his hands were then fastened by nails to the 
transverse beam, and his feet were also nailed. It is more 
probable that both feet were not fastened with one nail ; but that 
a nail was used with each foot. Sometimes it would appear, 



IN THE SCRIPTURE. 



323 



that trie culprit was attached to the cross before that it was 
raised and put into its place. The crucified person was left to 
die gradually of exhaustion and the torture of the cross. As 
long as he lived a guard was in attendance, which went away 
after his death : but the body continued suspended as it was ; 
and it was only as a matter of favour that the friends were per- 
mitted to bury him. The Jews, however, on account of the 
law of Deuter., (xxi, 22, 23,) had permission from the Eomans 
to bury on the first day any one of their nation who had been 
condemned to this punishment. Hence, if the person did not 
die from the torture of the cross on the first day, wild beasts 
were let loose upon him, or his bones were broken, or he was by 
some other means put to death. The Jews, in our Redeemer's 
time, were accustomed to give to persons on whom this punish- 
ment was inflicted a medicated draught — wine mixed with 
myrrh — for the purpose of deadening their sense of pain : this 
potion our Redeemer refused to take. (Matt., xxvii, 24 ; Mark, 
xv, 23.) This draught is not to be confounded with the 
vinegar which was offered to Him on the cross by the Roman 
soldiers. (Matt., xxvii, 48 ; Mark, xv, 36 ; Luke, xxiii, 36 ; 
Johnxix, 29.) As crucifixion was the most shameful of punish- 
ments, so it was one of the most cruel and excruciating which 
the art of ingeniously tormenting and extinguishing life ever 
devised. This has been most fully and scientifically demon- 
strated by learned medical writers. (See Jahn, Archteologia.) 
But it is easily conceived by all how horrible must be this tor- 
ture, when we consider first the exquisitely painful posture of 
the body : second, the piercing through with rude nails of the 
hands and feet — those members so abundantly supplied with 
nerves and tendons peculiarly susceptible of paiu : third, the 
exposure of so many wounds, caused by the previous scourging, 
to the inflammatory action of the open air : fourth, the dreadful 
increase of pain in the wounds of the hands and feet, and along 
the lacerated back, by every — the slightest — motion of the 
body. 

We proceed now to speak of the punishments that were not 
capital — and 

First. — Of scourging, which was a very ancient punishment 
under the Mosaic law. At a later period of the J ewish state, it 
was not confined to the judicial tribunals, but was inflicted also 
in the synagogues. According to the law, (Deut., xxv, 2, 3,) 
the number of stripes was in no case to exceed 40, and at a later 
period the Jews, through a scrupulous fear of transgressing the 
law, limited the number to 39. According to the Talmudists, 
the whip used for the purpose of inflicting this punishment, con- 



324 



OF THE PUNISHMENTS MEKOPIONED 



sisted of three thongs, and thus by thirteen strokes of it the full 
number of stripes was giren, i. e. 39. (2 Corinth., xi, 24.) Ve 
are not, however, to confound with this the scourging under 
the Eoman law, which was not restricted to any number of 

stripes. 

Second. — Of retaliation — the lex talionis, we have spoken 
already. 

Third. — Pecuniary fines were decreed by several statutes of 
the Mosaic law ; in some cases the amount was fixed by the 
statute, in other cases the amount was undetermined, left to the 
decision of the judges. In all cases the fines were paid to the 
injured party. 

Eourth. — Imprisonment does not appear to have been decreed 
by Closes as a punishment, nor was the prison much required in 
early times, even for the custody of criminals, so summarily was 
the law then executed. In the beginning it would seem that 
the Hebrews often used as prisons empty cisterns, and hence 
the prison came to be designated by the name pit or cistern, 
TD (bor). Gen., Ix, 15 ; Exod, xii, 19.) In more recent times 
imprisonment became common among the Jews ; the prison being 
used not only for the custody of criminals, but also as a punish- 
ment. (Jerem., xxxvii, 15-20.) And after the captivity, the 
Jews, like other nations, used the prison for the punishment of 
debtors, who were sometimes, as is still the custom in the east, 
subjected to stripes. (Matt., v, 26 ; xviii, 28-34.) The Eoman 
law recognised a certain kind of confinement which differed from 
imprisonment, because the person was permitted to dwell in his 
own house, being guarded by a soldier, to whom he was chained. 
'Acts, xxviii, 16.) And among the Romans, if a gaoler allowed 
a prisoner to escape, he was often condemned to the precise 
puDishment which awaited such prisoner. 

Fifth. — Depriving of sight. In Eastern countries it was an- 
ciently not an uncommon practice to put out the eyes of prisoners. 
Thus, Samson was deprived of sight by the Philistines. (Judg., 
xvi, 21.) In Persia, down to a late period, this punishment was 
inflicted in certain cases of rebellion. 

Sixth. — Cutting or pinching off the hair of criminals was 
another practice of the Eastern nations in the ancient times. On 
some occasions this appears to have been intended simply as a 
mark of ignominy : at other times the hair was plucked off with 
such violence as to cause considerable pain. 

Seventh. — Excommunication was in use amongst the ancient 
Hebrews. TTe read in the Scripture, that Esdras, convoking at 
Jerusalem an assembly of all the Jews who had returned from 
the captivity, declared that whoever would not attend this meet- 



IX THE SCRIPTURE. 



325 



ing would continue separated from the assembly of the people. 
(1 Esdras, x, 8.) This was excommunication, and there does 
not appear to be any sufficient reason for asserting that before 
the time of Esdras this power of excommunication was not 
exercised. At all events, it was a well-known punishment in 
the time of our Ptedeemer, who foretold that His apostles 
would be subjected to it on His account. (Luke, vi, 22 ; John, 
ix, 22 ; xii, 42 ; xvi, 2.) Excommunication, according to the 
Rabbins, consists in the privation of some right which one 
had enjoyed previously in the communion or in the society of 
which he is a member. This privation either falls on sacred 
or on civil matters, or on both together. It is imposed by a 
human sentence on account of some fault, either real or apparent, 
and it is not without a hope of afterwards re-entering on the 
use of those things, of which the sentence deprives one. The 
Hebrews had two sorts of excommunication — the greater and 
the lesser. By the former, the person subjected to it was re- 
moved from the society of all the members of the Jewish church 
and that for an unlimited period. The second only removed the 
excommunicated person from social intercourse, and from the 
synagogue for a short time, according to the Rabbins thirty days : 
and even that period might be shortened by repentance. Some 
distinguish three sorts of excommunication among the Jews 
by the three names of Nidui, Cher em, and Shamatha, or Shematha. 
The first marks the minor excommunication ; the second the 
greater ; and the third designates a still more terrible sort of 
excommunication, to which the penalty of death is said to have 
been attached, and from which no one could absolve. However, 
Selden and others contend that there never were among the 
Hebrews any but the two kinds of excommunication — the greater 
and the less, such as we have described them. We may here 
observe that excommunication did not exclude those upon whom 
it was inflicted from the celebration of the festivals, nor from 
admission into the temple : they were also admissible to the 
feasts which were made in the temple on the solemn festivals. 
The Talmud merely says that the excommunicated persons en- 
tered the temple on the left side, and went out on the right ; 
whereas, others entered on the right side and went out on the 
left. To conclude — amidst the variety of things which the 
Rabbins tell us regarding excommunication, and which can- 
not now be traced in the ancient practice of the Hebrews, 
there is, no doubt, some truth, but to distinguish this from 
what is fictitious is a matter of the greatest difficulty. 

Eighth. — Offerings in the nature of punishment. These offer- 
ings were instituted for procuring the remission of the legal 



;326 



OP THE PrXN'ISEOfEXTS MENTIONED, ETC, 



punishment when one had rendered himself liable to this punish- 
ment by transgressing the Levitical law, through error, precipi- 
tancy, or indeliberation. I say through error, precipitancy, or 
indeliheration, because we often read of the penalty of extirpa- 
tion being attached to similar violations of the law when these 
were deliberate. (Levit., iv, 2 ; v, 1, 4, 7.) And here we may 
observe regarding this penalty of extirpation that when God 
says : 1 will cut off that soul from among the people ; we are to 
understand that God takes into His own hands the inflicting of 
punishment, and that the family of the guilty person shall be 
removed by death ; (comp. 3rd Kings, xiv, 10; xxi, 21 ; 4th Kings, 
ix, 8 ;) but if the form of expression used be, " Let that person 
he cut off from the midst of his people" then the punishment of 
death by stoning is to be understood. (Lev., xvii, 4 ; xx, 10-18 ; 
comp. Exocl., xxi, 14; xxxv, 2 ; Heb. x, 28.) *To return now 
to the cases in which one could obtain by sacrifice the remission 
of the legal punishments, the sacrifices by which this could be 
effected are divided into sin-offerings and trespass-offerings ; for 
by these words sin and trespass does our Douay version render 
the words of the vulgate, peccatum and delictum — the Chattaath 
(ilMEn) and asham (DtPH) of the Hebrew. These sacrifices are 
sometimes designated by the names respectively of sin and tres- 
pass. The difference between sin and trespass is explained by 
Jahn, (Archceoh, § 246,) as follows: — Sin in this very strict 
sense, as distinguished from trespass, was a transgression of 
some negative law, and not without witnesses : trespass was a 
transgression of some affirmative law committed in the absence 
of all witnesses. "We class these sin and trespass offerings 
among punishments, inasmuch as the guilty party suffered the 
loss of the victim which he offered. Besides the case of trans- 
gressing the law through error, precipitancy, or indeliberation, 
these offerings in the nature of punishment were prescribed in 
some other cases. For instance, first, in certain cases of perjury, 
not however when the perjury went to impeach an innocent 
person, because there the lex talionis, or law of retaliation ope- 
rated. Secondly, whoever had incurred debt to the sanctuary by 
neglecting to pay what was due from him towards the support 
of the priests and the Divine worship, had the punishment of 
this sin remitted to him by means of an offering; he was 
obliged, however, at the same time to pay up his deficiencies 
with one-fifth over and above. The same was the rule where a 
person denied anything given him in trust, or anything lost 
which he had found. It was also the rule in some other cases of 
injustice referred to in Lev., (vi, 1-7.) In all these cases the legal 
punishment was remitted by means of the offering, whilst at 



OF THE TRIBUTE AND TAXES, ETC. 



327 



the same time the delinquent was obliged to make restitution, 
and to add one-fifth over and above what was required to repair 
the injury done to the aggrieved party. 



CHAPTER VII. 

OF THE TRIBUTE AND TAXES MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTURE. 

We have already treated of the revenue of the Jewish kings. 
For the purposes of Divine worship we find at an early period 
voluntary contributions made by the people, as in the case of the 
construction of the tabernacle. (Exod.,xxv, 2 ; xxxv, 5.) After- 
wards, God commanded that upon the occasion of taking the 
census of the people, the payment of half a sicle should be made 
by every male of twenty years and upwards to provide for the 
expenses of Divine worship and the necessary repairs of the 
tabernacle. (Exod., xxx, 13, 14.) It is not here defined how 
often this payment should be made. Erassen (Disqut'sitiones 
biblicce, on 30th chap, of Exodus, page 547,) thinks that as often 
as the census of the people would be made, whether by the order 
of God or on account of some public necessity, or an impend- 
ing war, so often should this tribute be paid. It appears that 
afterwards the wants of the tabernacle or temple at any time 
were considered a sufficient reason for demanding this tribute. 
(See 2 Paralip., xxiv, 5-9.) 

After the return from the Babylonian captivity, the people 
imposed upon themselves an annual tribute of the third part 
of a sicle for the support of the temple. (2 Esdras, x, 32.) Sub- 
sequently the enactment of Moses was deemed by the Jews to 
be of perpetual annual obligation, and hence, in the time of our 
Saviour, the two drachmae (or half sicle) were paid accordingly, 
whether the Jew was a native, or residing in foreign countries. 
(See Jahn, Archceologia.) Hence, such vast treasures were 
accumulated in the temple, in which there was a place called the 
treasury (TafypvXocx.tov) specially appropriated to their recep- 
tion. After the destruction of Jerusalem, Vespasian by an 
edict commanded that the annual half sicle should in future be 
brought by the Jews, wherever they were, into the Roman 
treasury. Of course, under the head of provision for the Divine 
worship come also the tithes and first fruits ; but of these we 
shall treat when we come to the subject of sacred antiquities. 

The scripture in several places speaks of the tribute paid to 



328 



OF THE MILITARY AFFAIRS 



the Hebrew nation by the neighbouring countries ; and on the 
other hand, of the tribute paid by the Hebrews to their con- 
querors, when adverse fortune visited them. When, in the 
latter times, they became subject to the Romans, they were 
made liable, of course, to the usual provincial taxes, everywhere 
exacted by the empire. The collection of these taxes was in the 
hands of a class of men denominated publicans (in Greek 
Tr^mt). They are often mentioned in the Gospel. There 
were two orders of them — one considered honourable, which ac- 
counted to the emperor. Thus Zaccheus is called by St. Luke a 
prince of the publicans. These had under them inferior collec- 
tors : to this inferior class of publicans belonged St. Matthew 
the apostle. These tax-gatherers were odious to all, being 
looked upon as licensed robbers. The Jews particularly detested 
them. The Herodians, a Jewish sect, to which there is refe- 
rence made in the gospel, went so far as to consider it unlawful 
to pay tribute to the Eomans, or to any foreigners. All the 
Jews agreed in avoiding the society of the publicans, as appears 
from the words of the Redeemer : ' i And if he will not hear the 
Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican " (St. 
Matt., xviii, 17.) 



CHAPTER VIII. 

OF THE MILITARY AFFAIRS OF THE JEWS AND OTHER NATIONS 
MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTURES. 

First.— Character of the first wars. We may trace the origin of 
wars, first of all, to disputes between ■ individuals ; then, as 
mankind continued to increase, these quarrels spread from in- 
dividuals to families, tribes, and nations. These very early 
wars appear to have been nothing more than predatory incursions 
resisted by the invaded party ; and when circumstances favoured 
the attempt often followed by retaliation. 

Second. — As to the character of the wars of the Israelites we 
may observe that the Hebrew nation was, on the whole, not 
inferior in warlike prowess to any of the neighbouring nations, 
even before the time of David ; but under that king they 
acquired a ■ marked superiority over all their rivals. At the 
same time, the institution of a regular standing army was prior 
to the time of David. He only augmented the army, which had 
been already organized under Saul. Solomon added to it cavalry 
and war chariots. After the captivity the warlike character of 
the Jews again shone forth under the Machabees. At the end, 



OE THE JEWS. 



329 



however, this nation, like its neighbours, was forced to succumb 
to the Boman power. 

Third. — As to the manner of raising the Hebrew armies, it is 
to be observed, that up to the time of the formation of a regular 
army under Saul there were not to be found in Israel any such 
thing as soldiers by profession. In the time of war the army 
was supplied from the inhabitants of the towns and country 
parts ; and when peace was restored these returned to their 
usual avocations. At the same time the country was never left 
without an effective force ; for we find as early as the second 
year after the coming out from Egypt, that when Moses took 
the census of the people he ordained, conformably to the com- 
mand of God, that every Israelite who had attained his twentieth 
year should be enrolled as a soldier. This enrolment was proba- 
bly made by the chiefs of the tribes, assisted by the genealogists 
or notaries : it was renewed thirty- eight years afterwards : and 
it affords a sufficient proof that in the country there was always 
an effective army, divided into several categories, in such a way 
that at the approach of war it was immediately known upon 
whom devolved the duty of marching against the enemy, and 
who they were who should form the army of reserve. Under 
David and the kings who came after him the enrolment of the 
whole body of the people, with a view to military duty, con- 
tinued ; and hence, the kings were never left to depend solely 
upon the standing army, but could, upon any occasion, bring into 
the field those vast numbers of men, of which we find mention 
in the scripture. Although the mass of the people was thus 
liable to be called upon to supply the armies of Israel, yet, there 
were certain exemptions granted by the law which should be 
proclaimed by the captains. The following persons were exempt 
from service : First, Every one who had built a house and had 
not yet dedicated it : who, therefore, had not yet dwelt in it ; 
for his dwelling in it would doubtless be preceded by this dedi- 
cation of it to God by prayer and thanksgiving. Second, Every 
one who had planted a vineyard or an olive yard, and had not 
yet eaten of the produce. Third, Every one who had betrothed 
a wife and had not yet taken her home : for, among the Jews a 
considerable period sometimes elapsed between the espousals and 
the celebration of the marriage. Fourth, Every newly married 
man, during the first year after his marriage. Fifth, Every 
fearful and faint-hearted person : the cowardice of these would 
have discouraged their brethren. (Deut. xx, 5-8 ; xxiv, 5.) 

Fourth. — In the time of David the Cerethi and Phelethi 
formed a distinct guard of the king. Concerning the origin of 
their name various opinions have been offered. The Chaldee 



330 



OF THE MILITARY AFFAIRS 



paraphrast understands their names to mean archers and sling ers. 
Some suppose that they were foreigners, designated by the names 
of the Gentile nations from which they were taken. 

Fifth. — The standing armies of the kings had their divisions 
and officers ; and on the model of these the rest of the people 
would, of course, arrange themselves for the purposes of war, 
when called out upon great emergencies. 

Sixth. — These divisions and officers are mentioned in several 
parts of the scripture. It would appear that the Hebrew army 
ordinarily formed three bodies, which Jahn would designate by 
the names of, the right wing, the left wing, and the centre. 
Certain parts of the scripture show that there was another divi- 
sion into bands of fifty each. We know, moreover, that the 
army was composed of companies of one hundred each, of legions 
or regiments of a thousand men, and of divisions of ten thousand 
men each. The cavalry, war chariots, and infantry, formed 
three different bodies, and the infantry was again divided, 
according to the character of the arms which they bore, whether 
light or heavy. 

The officers of the Hebrew army appear not to have differed 
materially from those who are found in ancient and modern 
armies. Every ten soldiers had an inferior officer placed over 
them, who is styled the captain of ten ; then the other divisions 
into fifties, hundreds, thousands, &c, had each their respective 
officer, named captain of fifty, of a hundred, a thousand, &c- 
The principal officer of the whole force, or captain of the host, 
appears to have held the same rank as the commander-in-chief 
of an army with us. After the establishment of the monarchy, 
it was usual for the kings in person to lead their troops to battle. 

Seventh. — Encampments. The Scripture does not afford us 
any definite information with respect to the form of the Hebrew 
camps after the entrance of the Israelites into the land of Canaan. 
Of the form and regulations of the camp during their sojourn in 
the desert, Aloses has given very precise details. The Sacred 
Tabernacle (as being the tent of the Great King) occupied the 
middle of the camp. It was immediately encompassed by the 
tents of the tribe of Levi. This tribe formed as it were the guard of 
the Invisible King, the priests being placed on the east side of 
the tabernacle where the entrance was. Round about the tribe 
of Levi were placed the other tribes: to the east were Juda, 
Issachar, and Zabulon ; to the south, Ruben, Simeon, and 
Gad; to the west, Ephraim, Manasses, and Benjamin; to the 
north, Dan, Aser, and KephthalL ~We find recorded in the 
Pentateuch, various regulations made by Hoses for the purpose 
of securing order in the camp and protecting public health. 



OF THE JEWS. 



331 



When the tabernacle was no longer carried about from place to 
place, it is most likely that the tent of the king, or in his 
absence, of the general of the army, occupied the middle of 
the camp, although we have no precise statement on the sub- 
ject in the Scripture. 

Eighth. — It appears from various passages of the Scripture, 
particularly Isai., ii, 4, and Mich., iv, 3, that there were among 
the Hebrews military schools or places in which the soldiers 
were trained by proper officers in the several military exercises. 
Swiftness of foot was an accomplishment much valued by the 
Hebrew soldier on account of the advantage which it afforded 
in attacking or pursuing an enemy. It must have been highly 
prized also by the ancient Greeks, as we see by the epithet 
of swift-footed so often given by Homer to his hero Achilles. 

Ninth. — The defensive arms of the Hebrews were — First, the 
shield, of which there were two sorts, the large shield or buckler 
iTJ2£, {tsinna,) and the small shield pft. {mag en.) They were 
generally made of osier or some light wood and covered with 
ox-hide, sometimes they were covered with brass. Shields made 
of brass were rare. It was usual to oil the shield to render it 
impenetrable to rain. To lose it in the day of battle was a 
great disgrace to the soldier. Second, the breastplate or corslet 
was intended for the defence of the back and breast, but prin- 
cipally of the latter ; it was made of various materials, some- 
times of flax or cotton woven very thick and close, sometimes 
of 'several pieces of metal joined together, being laid upon each 
other after the manner of the scales of a fish — (the squamea lorica 
of the Romans) — some were composed of two pieces of iron or brass 
joined together, and covering the back and breast. The Hebrew 
name of the breast plate is ]YHtP (shiryon.) There is no doubt 
but it was in common use among the Gentile nations. It would 
appear to have been also used by the Jews. Thus we find in the 
3rd Book of Kings, xxii, 34, according to the Hebrew, mention 
made of the shiryon of Achab. Third, the helmet or military cap 
by which the head was protected. In the earliest ages the 
helmet was made of osier or rushes in the form of a beehive, 
or of a skull-cap. The skins of the heads of animals, of lions, 
bears, wild boars, bulls, and horses, were likewise adopted. 
Wood, linen cloth in many folds, and a kind of felt, were also 
in early use, and helmets of these materials are known to have 
been worn by the nations of Asia, even before the departure 
of the Israelites from Egypt. Helmets of metal had also been 
iatroduced even at that early period. There is no doubt but 
helmets were in common use among the Hebrew soldiers ; thus, 



332 



OF THE MILITAJiY AFFAIRS 



we find King Ozias providing helmets for his vast army of three 
hundred and seven thousand five hundred men. (2 Paralip., 
xxvi. 14.) Fourth, the (/reaves, or military boots, were used at 
least among the Philistines, as we see by Goliath's greaves of 
brass. I st Kings, xvii. 6. ) Fifth, we must not omit to mention the 
military girdle at which the sword was suspended, and which 
also served to bind together the soldier's dress and armour that 
he might not be impeded by these in the engagement, hence the 
phrase so common, to gird to the battle. 

Tenth. — The offensive arms were either used in the close en- 
gagement with the enemy, or for the purpose of assailing or 
annoying the enemy from a distance. Of the first kind were 
the battle-axe or club and the sword. The former appears to 
have been cur seldom ustd by the Hebrews, and is scarcely re- 
ferred to in the Scripture. It was originally made of hard 
wood, afterwards of some hard metal. Some suppose that 
there is an allusion to it in the 2nd Psalm. 9th verse. u Thou 
shalt rule them with a rod of iron, in Hebrew br^2 BOB? 
{shelet barrel.) The sword, however, was among them of very 
early and very frequent use. Swords were of various dimen- 
sions, some long, and others short ; some had also a double edge. 
The edge is called the mouth of the sword by the Hebrews. 
"When not in use the sword was kept in a scabbard. As it was 
of polished metal, it is used figuratively to designate the light- 
ning. Second, another weapon used in close engagement was 
the spear, which was a long pole pointed with iron and not 
unlike the javelin, which was thrown at the enemy. 

The weapons used for assailing the enemy from a distance 
were — first, the javelin, consisting like the spear of a long wooden 
pole terminating in an iron point. Of course the aim of the 
soldier who used the javelin would be so to cast the weapon as 
to make it pierce the enemy. Second, the low and arrow, the 
bow was of wood ; sometimes, but seldom, of brass. It was a work 
of no slight difficulty to bend the bow : to do this, one extremity 
of it was placed upon the ground and the foot put on it, the other 
extremity of the bow was then pressed down with the left hand, 
whilst with the right the cord was adjusted in its place : hence, 
the low is used in Scripture to signify bending the bow. 
Arrows were at first made of the reed, alter wards of some light 
wood : they were always pointed with iron. The quiver was of 
a pyramidal form slang on the soldier's back with the points of 
the arrows downward. Third, the sling, is one of the most 
ancient weapons of battle, it was much used by the Hebrews. 
Those slingers are specially praised. who ; like the Benjamites, 



OF THE JEWS. 



333 



could manage their weapon with, the left hand as well as the 
right. (Judges, xx, 16; 1 Paral., xii, 2.) 

Eleventh. — When there was question of attacking or defend- 
ing fortified places, other weapons were brought into action. 
Many of the cities of Palestine being built upon eminences were 
fortified by nature ; but most frequently they were surrounded 
by a lofty wall, on which were erected towers. These towers 
were furnished with machines, from which the besieged could 
discharge arrows and large stones. When, on the other hand, 
the Israelites were about to besiege a city, they dug trenches, 
drew a line of circumvallation, and erected against it forts, pro- 
vided with machines for casting arrows and stones. They also 
used the battering ram against the besieged city. This was at 
first merely a beam of timber, which the soldiers lifted up and 
impelled forcibly against the walls. Afterwards it was the cus- 
tom to suspend the beam by chains from some support, and then to 
impel it repeatedly against the wall until it was beaten down, or 
a breach effected. 

Twelfth. — It was usual among the Eastern nations formally 
to proclaim war, but this was not always observed. If the 
enemy came by surprise, or the war broke out on a sudden, the 
people was then summoned by means of messengers or heralds ; 
by the sounding of the war trumpets ; and by loud shouting on 
the mountains, to which the people of the neighbouring moun- 
tains responded. 

Thirteenth. — Battles are not described at length in the bible, 
but are mentioned briefly. It appears that the onset was 
very violent, and made with a loud shout. Very frequently the 
soldiers fought man to man against each other : hence, ordinarily 
courage, agility, and strength of body decided the contest. The 
slaughter was also immense, as we see in the records of several 
of the battles mentioned in the scripture- 

Fourteenth. — The treatment of the slain, and of captives, was 
very cruel in those early wars. In this respect, however, the 
Israelites were distinguished among the other Eastern nations 
for their greater humanity. Ordinarily, when a victory was 
gained the rites of burial were not refused to the slain. When 
a city had held out with great obstinacy it was sometimes after 
being taken rased to the foundation, sown with salt, and 
ploughed up in token of perpetual desolation. 

Fifteenth. — After the victory the conquerors were received 
with great joy by the people ; the victory was proclaimed from 
the mountain tops ; even the women came forth singing and 
dancing to meet the victorious leaders, and congratulate them on 
their triumph. (Judges, xi, 34-37 ; 1st Kings, xviii, 6, 7.) 



334 



OF THE MILITARY AFFAIRS 



Sixteenth. — According to the general usage of the Hebrews, 
the spoil was distributed among the soldiers; those who had 
charge of the baggage being entitled to an equal share with 
those who were actually engaged in the fight. Things of great 
value were sometimes claimed by the general. (Judges, viii, 
24, 25.) David, imitating this practice, afterwards collected by 
such means large treasures for the building of the temple. (2nd 
Kings, viii, 11, 12; xii, 30.) If a city, however, was devoted 
to Anathema, none of its spoils were to be preserved : this law 
seldom admitted of exception. 

Seventeenth. — Besides the congratulations of the people, and 
a share in the distribution of the spoil, various military rewards 
were conferred upon those who had pre-eminently distinguished 
themselves in war : of this the scripture furnishes several 
instances. 

Eighteenth. — In the early times, and even under the kings, 
with the exception of the officers and the life-guards, there was 
no regular pay given to the soldiers. They were obliged to pro- 
vide themselves with necessaries, and to depend for remunera- 
tion on the chance of booty. The Machabees in imitation of the 
Greeks introduced the regular stipend or pay of each soldier. 
Hence, the soldier's stipend was everywhere paid in the time of 
St. Paul, who borrows several illustrations from it. (Rom,, vi, 
23 ; 1 Corinth., ix, 7 ; 2 Tim., ii, 4 ; &c.) 

Nineteenth. — The system of warfare practised by the Egyp- 
tians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Philistines, and the other 
Eastern nations mentioned in Scripture, must have agreed in its 
general character with that practised by the Hebrews. It was 
by imitating some of these nations, particularly the Egyptians, 
that the Hebrews learned the art of war ; and on the other hand, 
the practice of Hebrew warfare may, in the course of time, have 
suggested some improvements in this art to those nations that 
lived on the borders of Israel. In one respect the nations which 
we have mentioned were better prepared for battle than the 
Jews were, at least down to the time of Solomon ; that was, in 
the possession of a numerous cavalry, and an extensive supply 
of war chariots. The horse, from a very early period, was used 
in battle. In the very ancient book of Job, we find a descrip- 
tion of the war horse surpassing in eloquence anything that has 
been ever written on the subject. (Job. xxxix, 19-25.) "We 
learn from the book of Exodus, that the Egyptians in the days 
of Moses had their armies well supplied with horsemen and 
war chariots. (Exod., xiv, 7.) The monuments of ancient Assyria 
abound with representations of cavalry and chariots of war. 
There is a reference to the war chariots of the Persians in the 



OF THE JEWS. 



prophet Isaias, (xxi, 7-9.) Great dependence was placed upon 
the chariots in the day of battle by the ancient Eastern nations, 
They continued to be nsed in Syria in the time of the Machabees. 
(2 Mach., xiii, 2.) That the Jews at their very entrance into 
the land of Chanaan, had to encounter armies well provided with 
war chariots, sufficiently appears from the book of Judges, where 
we have an account of the army of Sisara, who commanded the 
the forces of Jabin, king of Chanaan. (Judges, iv, 15.) 

Now, on the other hand, the Israelites not being intended by 
God to extend their possessions among foreign nations, but 
simply to carry on war as far as it was necessary for the purpose 
of acquiring and defending the territory which was marked out 
for them, and had been promised to their fathers, they were not 
permitted in the beginning to procure for military purposes a 
large body of horsemen or of chariots. In the 17th chapter of 
Deuteronomy, where the law is laid down by which the future 
king of the Hebrew people should be guided, it is expressly 
stated (16th verse), that " he shall not multiply horses to him- 
self. When the Jews in their early wars got possession of the 
horses of their enemies, they hamstrung them, as we read of 
David. (2nd Kings, viii, 4.) Upon the occasion here mentioned, 
David reserved horses for one hundred chariots. This appears 
to have been the commencement of the use of horses and 
chariots in the armies of the Hebrews. Under Solomon 
we find a most imposing cavalry force which that monarch 
distributed among the fortified cities of his kingdom, in- 
cluding Jerusalem. (3rd Kings, x, 26.) Interpreters here 
observe that Solomon was guilty of transgressing the law 
of Deuteronomy already mentioned, and, therefore, sinned 
in this particular. And it does not appear that at any time 
those princes of the Hebrew people who were distinguished for 
their piety, ever laid great stress on the possession of a numerous 
cavalry. They justly understood the prohibition of Deuteronomy 
against multiplying horses, to convey a lesson of confidence in 
God rather than in armies. For the nations round about them 
placed their chief reliance upon their chariots and horsemen : of 
these they were particularly proud. To this does David allude 
when he says : " Some trust in chariots, and some in horses : but 
we will call upon the name of the Lord our God." (Psalm 
xix, 8.) 

Chariots of two kinds appear have been used in the Eastern 
armies. Some were simply travelling carriages, used for convey- 
ing warriors of distinction to or from the field of battle : others 
were more probably war-chariots, and used in the engagement. 
We find this distinction of chariots marked in the history of the 



336 



OF THE MILITARY AFFAIRS OF THE JEWS. 



death of King Josias, in the battle of Mageddo. (2 Paralip., 
xxxv, 23, 24.) Sometimes the war- chariots were armed with 
scythes or hooks to render them more destructive, Of such 
there is mention made in the Second Book of ILachabees, (xiii, 
2.) The ILachabean princes had the glory of conquering power- 
ful enemies, who brought into the field all those improvements 
in the system of warfare which made their way into the East 
with the establishment of the Grecian monarchy. At length, 
before the coming of our Eedeemer. that power which subdued 
the world by its numerous and well-trained armies, brought the 
Jews under subjection to it. Hence 

Twentieth.- — Eoman military affairs are frequently referred 
to in the Xew Testament, particularly by St. Paul in his many 
allusions to the Eoman discipline and triumphs. Of course the 
reader will not require to be informed in this place respecting 
the military system and practices of the Eoman s. His classical 
course will have him supplied with that knowledge. We shall 
merely observe that an acquaintance with these practices is 
necessary, in order to catch the full meaning of the above-men- 
tioned beautiful allusions of the Apostle. 

Let us take one or two examples. St. Paul, in his Second 
Epistle to Timothy, (ii, 3,) tells his disciple to " labour as a good 
soldier of Christ Jesus." Here the Greek word, which is trans- 
lated by labour, is 'siazonafyGov that is literally, endure hardship. 
2S"ow the hardships endured by the Eoman soldiers were wonder- 
ful : take the following as a specimen. "The load which a 
Eoman soldier carried is almost incredible : victuals for fifteen 
clays, sometimes more, usually corn as being lighter ; sometimes 
dressed food ; utensils, a saw, a basket, a mattock, an axe, a hook 
and leathern thong, a chain, a pot, &c. ; stakes, usually three or 
lour, sometimes twelve ; the whole amounting to sixty pounds 
weight, besides arms ; for a Eoman soldier considered these not 
as a burden, but as part of himself. Under this load they 
commonly marched twenty miles a day, sometimes more." — 
Adams. (Roman Antiquities, p. 316. Fourteenth edition.) 

Again, in the Epistle to the Colossians, (ii, 15,) speaking of our 
Eedeemer, the apostle says : " And despoiling the principalities 
and powers, he hath exposed them confidently in open show, 
triumphing over them in himself." Here there is a beautiful 
allusion to the solemn triumph with which a Eoman general was 
honoured after a great victory. In that grand procession a 
prominent place was assigned to the carriages which contained 
the spoils taken from the enemy, and after these followed the 
captive leaders in chains, with their children and attendants. 
Thus were these vanquished leaders of the enemy made an igno- 



OF SACRED PLACES. 



337 



minious spectacle, in one of the most imposing pageants recorded 
in all antiquity. 



DISSERTATION XVI. 

ON" THE SACRED ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS. 



CHAPTER I. 

OF SACRED PLACES. 

First. — We commence with the Tabernacle, the construction of 
which was prior to the entrance of the Hebrews into the Holy 
Land. The Tabernacle was a moveable and portable structure, 
so formed that the parts could be easily taken asunder for the 
facility of carriage. It was in length thirty cubits, in width 
ten, and ten cubits also in height. It was divided into two parts 
by a veil, one of these parts was called the Holy, and contained 
twenty cubits in length, the other part was called the Holy of 
Holies, and measured ten cubits in length. In the Holy were 
the candlestick, the table of the loaves of proposition, and the 
altar of incense ; in the Holy of Holies was the ark of the cove- 
nant, with the Propitiatory. Into the Holy the priests entered 
daily, morning and evening, to burn incense and to trim the 
lights of the seven-branched candlestick ; but into the Holy of 
Holies only the High Priest entered, and that on, only one day of 
the year, the great clay of expiation. (Lev., xvi.) The walls 
of the Tabernacle were composed of planks or boards, forty-eight 
in number, each being a cubit and a half in width, and ten cubits 
in length. Of these, twenty were required for the side towards 
the north, twenty for the south side, and eight for the west side 
of the Tabernacle ; these' latter eight made up the exterior 
breadth of the tabernacle. The east side, on which was the 
entrance, had merely five gilded columns covered by a rich veil. 
The roof was a frame of planks, over which were thrown 
four coverings, of which the first or innermost was made of 
fine linen curiously embroidered in various colours of white, 
purple, scarlet, and violet ; this cover approached within a cubit 
of the ground on the sides of the tabernacle ; the second cover- 
ing was of goats' hair curiously wove together ; it almost reached 
to the ground ; the third cover was of rams' skins dyed red, and 
the fourth or outermost of azure-coloured skins. 



z 



338 



OF SACRED PLACES. 



Bound about the tabernacle was a quadrangular court, open 
above, having one hundred cubits in length, fifty in breadth, and 
five in the height of the veil with which it was surrounded. 
(Exod., xxvii, 18.) Sixty columns stood round this court, 
twenty on the side of the north, twenty on the south side, ten 
towards the west, and ten towards the east. These columns, 
formed, as Jahn supposes, of wood, were overlaid with silver, 
but the bases were of brass. The columns were connected to- 
gether by poles made of silver, from which the veil was sus- 
pended that surrounded the court. The entrance of the court 
was on the east side, twenty cubits in breadth, where the veil, 
supported by four columns, was remarkable for the richness and 
variety of its colours and embroidery. This court was, as it 
were, the temple of the people, who were not permitted to enter 
the tabernacle. In the court, at some distance from the taber- 
nacle, stood the altar of holocausts, and between the altar 
and tabernacle was placed the brazen laver for the priests to 
wash themselves before ministering. (Exod., xxx, 18.) The 
altar of holocausts was three cubits in height, five in length, and 
five in breadth. It was made of wood in the form of a chest, 
but hollow, and open at top and bottom. The four corners 
of the altar, above, had something like four horns ; from these 
there hung, fastened with four rings and four chains, a grate 
made of brass, on which the wood and the sacrifices were burnt, 
and as the ashes fell through, they were received below in a pan. 

jS"ow, as to the furniture of the Holy, there was first the y olden 
candlestick, with an upright stem, on each side of which were three 
curved branches; to all the seven extremities were attached lamps, 
or these all were kept burning during the night, and three during 
the day. (Exod., xxx, 8 ; ^STunib., xxxiv, 3 ; Joseph. Antiq., iii, 8.) 
It was part of the duty of the priests to trim the lamps, morning 
and evening. Second, the table of the loaves of proposition. This 
was made of wood. We may here observe that for all the wood- 
work of the tabernacle and its appurtenances, there was used 
the wood of the Acacia tree, which grew in the wilderness, and 
is said to be incorruptible ; in our version it is called setim-wood 
alter the Hebrew. "Well, this table being made of wood, was 
covered over with plates of gold. The loaves of proposition 
placed upon this table were twelve in number, representing the 
twelve tribes of Israel. They were also called the bread of the 
face, because they were placed before the face— or throne of 
Jehova, which was in the Holy of Holies. These loaves were of 
unleavened bread, and were changed every Sabbath by the 
priests, who alone, according to the law, could eat of them, 
except in case of necessity. (ILatt., xii, 4.) They were a con- 



OP SACKED PLACES, 



339 



tinual acknowledgment on the part of the twelve tribes of 
Israel that they depended upon God for their support, and 
they were typical of the Holy Eucharist. Third, between the 
table of the loaves of proposition, which stood on the northern 
side of the Holy and the golden candlestick, which was on the 
south side, there was placed the altar of incense over against the 
veil, which divided the Holy of Holies, or most holy place, from 
the Holy place. It was constructed of the setim-wood ; it was a 
cubit in length and breadth, and two cubits in height ; it was 
ornamented with horns at the four corners, and was all covered 
with plates of gold, wherefore it was called the golden altar ; and 
sometimes to distinguish it from the altar of the holocausts, it 
was called the inner altar. On this altar, every day, morning 
and evening, was incense offered. 

In the Holy of Holies was the Ark of the Covenant — an 
oblong chest, constructed of setim-wood, a cubit and a-half in 
breadth and height, and two cubits and a-half in length ; it was 
covered on all sides with the purest gold ; and on both sides, 
lengthwise, at equal distances it was furnished with four rings of 
gold, through which were passed bars covered with gold, for the 
purpose of carrying the ark. These bars were always kept in 
the rings, even when the ark was afterwards placed in the tem- 
ple. The ark was so placed in the Holy of Holies that the 
extremities of tbese bars touched the veil. (Exod., xxv, 10-15; 
xxxvii, 1-9 ; 3rd Kings, viii, 8 ; 1st Parol., v, 8, 9.) The cover 
of the ark made no part of it, but was simply laid upon it. This 
cover was of the same length and breadth with the ark : it was 
made of pure gold, and was called the propitiatory or mercy-seat, 
because on it was placed the throne of Jehova — as of the Great 
King among His people ; and here, therefore, the Lord was to be 
appeased and propitiated. It was also called by a name which 
signifies the place of giving responses, (in the Vulgate oraculnm,) 
because here it was usual to consult the Lord, and to receive 
answers from Him, audibly expressed in words. (Numb., vii, 89.) 
On this cover of the ark stood two figures representing two 
cherubim, with their faces turned towards each other, and their 
wings expanded and joined so as to cover the propitiatory. Be- 
cause this was the place of the special presence of Jehova among 
His people, He was said to sit on these wings of the cherubim 
as on His throne, having under him the ark, as it were the foot- 
stool of His feet. To this there are several allusions in the 
scripture, as when God is said to " sit upon the cherubim, 5 ' (4th 
Kings, xix, 15,) and when the psalmist says, " Aclore the foot- 
stool of his feet." (Psalm, xcviii, 5.) In the ark there were only 
the two tables of stone, upon which the ten commandments were 



340 



OF SACRED PLACES. 



inscribed. Beside the ark was kept a portion of the manna in a 
^olden nrn. 'Exod., xvi, 32-36.) Also the rod of Aaron, (Numb., 
xxxi, 26), and the autograph of the volume of the law. (Deut., 
xxxi, 26.) 

As to the figure of the cherubs or cherubim that stood on the 
propitiatory, interpreters are by no means agreed. Some suppose 
that they represented men, others say that they resembled other 
animals/ Josephus declares that they resembled no animals that 
ever were seen by man, and that their form no man knew in his 
day. (Antiq., iii, 6.) The learned Jew, Abenezra, thinks that 
the term cherubim was indiscriminately applied to figures of any 
kind that were sculptured on stone, engraven on metal, carved on 
wood or inwrought on cloth ; although with regard to the cheru- 
bim placed by Moses on the propitiatory or mercy-seat, he gives 
it as his opinion that these were figures of winged men or boys. 
Calmet in his Dictionary, (v. Cherubim,) says that the cherubim 
described in the scripture were not all of the same figure, although 
they all agreed in this, that each of them consisted of the forms 
of many things collected into one, as of a man, an ox, an eagle, 
and a lion : of which kind were the cherubim mentioned in 
Ezechiel, (i, o.) Tet Calmet inclines to the opinion that the 
cherubim of the ark exhibited the human figure. In fine, taking 
the cherubim described in Ezechiel as a guide, we would con- 
clude that each cherub had four distinct faces on one neck — that 
of a man, of a lion, of an ox, and of an eagle. Each had four 
wings, the two under ones covering the body, while the upper 
ones, spread out somewhat above the level of the shoulders, were 
so joined to the edges of its neighbour's as to form a canopy. 

The tabernacle was constructed in the desert, and with its 
different parts and furniture svas intended to typify the church 
of God, militant and triumphant. (See Exod., xxv, 40 ; Hebrews, 
viii 5.) After the entrance of the Israelites into the promised 
land, it continued for a considerable time to be the place for 
worshipping God. In the time of Heli, the High Priest, the 
ark was'taken by the Philistines. The Israelites had brought it 
into their camp, hoping that God would grant them victory on 
account of its presence. The Philistines placed it in the temple 
of Dagon, their idol. Terrified, however, by the manifestations 
of Divine power, thev soon restored the ark to the Hebrews, but 
it does not appear that the tabernacle and ark were ever united 
afterwards. In the beginning of Solomon's reign we know that 
the tabernacle was at Gabaon, in the tribe of Benjamin; the 
scripture does not speak of it afterwards. The ark of the 
covenant was in existence until the destruction of the temple 
built by Solomon. . 



OF S1CREB PLACES, 



341 



Second. — The Temple was first built by Solomon — a magnifi- 
cent work — but its dimensions and parts are too briefly noticed 
in the scripture to enable one to give an accurate description of 
it. It stood on Mount Moria, in Jerusalem. This mount 
formed a part of the mountainous ridge termed Mount Sion. 
The temple, therefore, stood in that part of Jerusalem which was 
called the city of David. It had two courts, of which the inner 
was the court of the priests. The whole plan of the building 
was on the model of the tabernacle, but of much larger dimen- 
sions. The holy house, or the temple strictly so called, was 
divided into the Holy and the Holy of Holies, and in front of 
this house stood a vestibule like a lofty tower, being one hundred 
and twenty cubits in height. The length of the holy house was 
one hundred and sixty feet, its breadth forty, and its height 
sixty feet. It was divided into three storeys ; and around the 
lower storey there "ran a colonnade, in which were the residences 
of the officiating priests and Levites. The utensils for the ser- 
vice of the temple were in much greater number than they had 
been in the tabernacle : thus, for example, in the Holy there 
were ten golden candlesticks. These utensils were also larger, 
in proportion to the increased dimensions of the structure : hence, 
the laver of brass, for the washing of the priests, was so large 
that it is termed the brazen sea. In the Holy of Holies was 
placed the ark of the covenant. And not to dwell more particu- 
larly on the matter, suffice it to say that the temple of Solomon 
was of surpassing magnificence for the beauty of its materials, 
and the richness of its furniture — particularly the holy house, or 
temple strictly so called, of which the inside walls and the 
ceiling were lined with cedar, beautifully carved, representing 
cherubim and palm trees, clusters of foliage, and open flowers ; 
and the whole interior was overlaid with gold, so that neither wood 
Dor stone was seen, and nothing met the eye but pure gold, 
either plain, as on the floor, or richly chased, and enriched with 
the gems they had brought from Egypt, upon the walls and ceil- 
ing. But not long did this temple retain its pristine splendour — 
about thirty-three or thirty-four years ; after which time Sesac, 
king of Egypt, pillaged Jerusalem, and carried away the treasures 
of the temple. (3rd Kings, xiv, 25, 26.) The building was 
finally plundered and burnt by the Chaldeans under JSabuchodo- 
nosor. 

After the captivity the temple was rebuilt by Zorobabel : its 
dimensions were inferior to those of the temple of Solomon, as 
the old men who had seen the first temple declared, as soon as 
they had viewed the foundations of this second building. There 
were also wanting in this second temple several things which 



342 



OF SACEED PLACES. 



principally contributed to the glory of the first— viz., the ark of 
the covenant — the holy oil— the Urim and Thummim — -and that 
mysterious cloud which accompanied the Tabernacle, and after- 
wards filled the temple built by Solomon. (3rd Kings, viii, 10- 
12.) In one respect, however, this second temple far outshone 
the first, viz., in the high honour of being visited by the Messias. 
(Agg., n, 7-9.) 

This second temple was, after the lapse of ages, so repaired 
and ornamented by Herod the Great, that it was afterwards 
called the temple of Herod, until the period of its destruction by 
the Romans. Notwithstanding, however, the extensive charac- 
ter of the changes made by Herod, yet, as Divine worship was 
never interrupted during the progress of his work, and as these 
changes were gradually introduced, this temple is properly con- 
sidered one with the temple of Zorobabel ; so that our Saviour is 
well said, according to the prophecy of Aggeus, to have honoured 
the second temple by His presence. Josephus, in the fifteenth 
book of his Antiquities, and the eleventh chapter, gives a descrip- 
tion of this temple of Herod — and truly the beauty and the vast- 
ness of the work must have rendered it the wonder of the world 
in its time. The work was commenced sixteen years before 
Christ, and although the work appertaining to the temple itself 
was substantially finished in eight years, yet the work of further 
ornamenting the temple, and of raising various other edifices 
which formed appendages to it, continued down to the sixty- 
fourth year of the Christian era. This temple had three courts : 
the exterior court was called the court of the Gentiles : within 
that was the court of the Israelites, separated by a wall from 
the court of the Gentiles. The innermost court, which imme- 
diately surrounded the holy house, was the court of the priests ; 
in it was placed the altar of burnt-offerings. In the middle of 
court of the Israelites ran a wall which separated the women 
from the men — the women remaining in the exterior division 
of the court. The court of the women was separated from the 
court of the Gentiles by a low stone wall, or partition, of elegant 
workmanship. From the court of the women there was an 
ascent of fifteen steps into the men's court ; which latter was 
separated from the priests' court by a low wall, one cubit in 
height. The lofty wall of the exterior court — that is, the outer 
wall of the temple — was built of stone, and formed a square of 
half a mile in circumference. The entrance was by nine gates, 
which were on every side thickly coated with gold and silver, 
but of these there was one far more precious than any of the rest, 
being made of Corinthian brass, which in those days was preferred 
to silver or gold, whilst at the same time it was much larger than 



OP SACRED PLACES. 



343 



any of the others, its entire height being fifty cubits, and the 
height of its doors forty cubits. This is supposed to have been 
the gate called beautiful. (Acts, iii, 2.) Immediately within 
this outer wall, and surrounding the court of the Gentiles, was 
a range of porticos or cloisters, above which were galleries, or 
apartments supported by pillars of white marble, each pillar 
consisting of a single piece, and five-and-twenty cubits in height. 
One of these porticos was called Solomon's porch or portico, 
because it stood upon a vast terrace which he had raised from 
the valley beneath, four hundred cubits high, in order to extend 
the area of the top of the mountain, and make it equal to the 
plan of his intended building. The south-east corner of the flat 
roof of this noble portico, where the height was greatest, is sup- 
posed to have been the xrepvyiov or pinnacle, whence Satan 
tempted our Saviour to precipitate Himself. (Matt., iv, 5.) The 
pavement of all the courts was of variegated marble. From the 
court of the priests twelve steps ascended to the holy house or 
temple, strictly so called, which was divided into three parts ; 
the porch, the sanctuary or holy place, and the Holy of Holies. 
The porch was open in front, and in it were suspended the votive 
offerings that had been made to the temple. From the porch the 
entrance into the sanctuary, or Holy, was by a doorway, covered 
merely with an embroidered veil. The division between the 
Holy and the Holy of Holies was also made by an embroidered 
veil ; this latter veil it was which was rent in two at the death 
of our Divine Eedeemer. The holy house or temple, strictly so 
called, far surpassed in splendour all the rest of this magnificent 
edifice — its exterior was profusely adorned with plates of gold ; 
and Josephus adds, that to persons approaching it, it appeared at 
a distance like a mountain covered with snow, for where it was 
not decorated with plates of gold, it was of exceeding whiteness. 
On the top it had sharp pointed spikes of gold, to prevent any 
bird from resting upon it and polluting it. The whole length of 
the Holy house was a hundred or a hundred and ten cubits — its 
height a hundred cubits ; the porch was loftier and wider than 
the other parts. The following were the internal dimensions of 
the three parts — the porch was fifty cubits long, by twenty in 
breadth, and ninety cubits in height — the Holy was forty cubits 
long by twenty in breadth, and sixty cubits high — the Holy of 
Holies was twenty cubits square, and sixty cubits high. 

We have but briefly noticed this vast edifice, which goes by 
the name of the temple of Herod ; we have by no means fully 
described it : but if we add to what has been said, that according 
to J osephus the stones used in this edifice were of vast dimen- 
sions — we are told, for instance, that the foundations of the holy 
house consisted of blocks of white marble, some of which were 



344 



OP SACEED PLACES. 



forty-five cubits long, six cubits wide, and five cubits high — I 
think enough shall have been stated to show that the surprise of 
the disciples of our Lord must have been extreme, when He 
foretold to them that soon there should not be left of it a stone 
upon a stone that would not be thrown down. (Mark., xiii, 2.) 

Third. — As to the high places mentioned in scripture, we 
read in Deuteronomy, (xii, 2, that. God charged the Israel- 
ites to destroy, according as they became masters of the countries 
of the idolaters, all the places where these nations were 
accustomed to worship their gods, such as places on the tops of 
mountains and hills, where we may suppose that altars were 
fitted up, and groves planted for the purposes of this worship. 
At the same time God declares that they ought not to do like 
these nations, that is, to adore on the mountains and the hills ; 
but that they were to go to the place which He Himself would 
select to establish His name there, and to dwell there ; and that 
it was in this place only that they should offer their sacrifices as 
well as their gifts, their tithes, and all their other offerings. 
ISTow, this place was first at Silo, where the Tabernacle and altar 
were until the time of Heli : then at Nobe, afterwards at 
Gabaon, &c, and lastly at Jerusalem. We may here observe 
that all the places where the ark was stationed at any time were 
regarded by the Hebrews as so many holy places. It is 
altogether likely that as long as the Israelites were sojourning 
in the desert they neither immolated victims nor presented their 
oblations except at the entrance of the Tabernacle. Such was 
the law. But, when once established in the land of Chanaan 
many of them found themselves placed at a great distance from 
this holy sanctuary ; these did not think that it was forbidden 
to them to offer to the Lord sacrifices upon high places, provided 
that they offered them to God alone, and by the hands of His 
priests, according to the rites prescribed by the law. And in 
effect it does not appear that they were blamed for this.* (See 
Josue, viii, Judges vi; xiii ; 1st Kings, vii, ix, xvi; 2nd Kings, 
xxiv.) It was only when the temple of Solomon had been built, 
and the ark of the covenant placed there permanently that God 
would no longer endure, under any pretext, victims to be offered 
to Him outside the precincts of this sacred dwelling. Those 
who were, otherwise, reckoned among the best of the kings, 
were blamed for having permitted the altars to remain on the 
high places, although they were consecrated to the Almighty. 
And as we see by the after history of the Israelite?, this toleration 
led to deplorable consequences. For, by little and little the 
Israelites went on from this violation of the law to embrace all the 

* In some cases they had a dispensation from Grod, in others they may 
hare been excused by ignorance. 



OF SACRED PLACES. 



345 



excesses of an idolatrous worship ; insomuch that nothing could 
hinder them from constructing high places like the other nations, 
erecting altars on the mountains, planting groves, and placing 
idols in them to be worshipped according to the rites of the Gen- 
tiles. 

Fourth. — Although the temple was the only place in which 
sacrifice could be offered, it was not in like manner the only place 
in which solemn prayer could be offered to God, and religious 
instruction communicated. For these purposes the Jews erected 
also other buildings, which are known by the name of synagogues. 
We find another name, viz., proseuchce, used to designate Jewish 
religious edifices ; but a great many learned men contend that 
this is only another name for the synagogues. To be sure, Cal- 
met and some others draw a line of distinction between them ; 
but since Josephus and Philo, who ought to be well acquainted 
with this matter, do not appear to make a distinction between 
the proseuchce and synagogues, neither shall we dwell upon any 
such distinction, but shall proceed at once to describe the 
synagogues. As to their origin — we find that in early times the 
praises of God were chanted in the schools of the prophets ; and 
it was usual among the pious portion of the people to assemble 
on the Sabbaths and new moons at the houses of the prophets 
for prayer and instruction. (1st Kings, x, 5-11 ; xix, 18-24; 4th 
Kings, iv, 23.) In the Babylonian captivity, the Jews being 
destitute of the solemn exercise of religion, were accustomed to 
frequent the houses of the prophets or of some other pious men, 
that they might hear these instructing their families in religion, 
or reading the sacred books for them. (Ezech., xiv, 1 ; xx, 1 ; 
Dan., vi, 11.) These domestic congregations by degrees became 
fixed in certain places, and a certain fixed order prevailed in 
them ; hence the origin of synagogues. As to the formal erection 
of synagogues, by that name we find no mention made of their 
existence in Palestine, even as late as the time of Antiochus 
Epiphanes. They appear in Palestine for the first time under the 
Asmonean princes, but according to Josephus they were much 
more ancient in other countries. Whatever is to be said of this 
point, we find in the time of the Apostles, that over the whole 
world, wherever there was a community of Jews, there the 
synagogue also was to be found. So great was their number 
at that period, that, if we believe the Jews, there were in 
Jerusalem alone, in the time of our Redeemer, no less than 
four hundred and eighty synagogues. They were built on 
the plan of the temple of Jerusalem, as they are to this day 
throughout all the east. A small apartment, more street man 
the rest of the building, recalled the memory of the Holy of 



346 



OF SACKED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



Holies. In this apartment was kept the book intended for the 
use of the reader : for the reading of the scripture formed a 
most important part of the services of the synagogue. And 
the places which were nearest to this apartment were consi- 
dered the most honourable. The service of the synagogue 
consisted of prayer, the reading of the Holy Scripture accompa- 
nied by its interpretation and preaching. Each synagogue had 
its rulers and other officers, of whom we shall speak when we 
come to treat of Sacred Persons. We shall merely observe here, 
in conclusion, that the Greek word cvvayc*jy7), like the word 
fxxX?j<7/a, according to its natural meaning, designates the 
assembly or congregation, although both words have come to 
signify the place of the assembly. 



CHAPTER II. 

OF SACKED TIMES AND SEASONS. 

And First, of the Sabbath : as to the antiquity of this seventh day 
of rest, it is a disputed point amongst interpreters of scripture 
whether the Sabbath was observed and in some way kept holy, 
from the creation, or whether the law enforcing its observance 
was first given through Moses. Pererius, writing on the third 
verse of the second chapter of Genesis, defends this second 
opinion, and quotes, in favour of his view of the matter, Euse- 
bius in the first book and fourth chapter of his Ecclesiastical 
History, St. Justin in his dialogue with Tryphon, and Tertullian 
and St. Cyprian, in their writings against the Jews. On the 
other hand, Erassen, in his disquisitions on the Pentateuch, 
traces the observance of the Sabbath from the beginning. He 
contends, moreover, that even the Pagans themselves were not 
strangers to the observance of this day. The opinion of Erassen, 
in favour of the antiquity of the Sabbath law, derives support 
from the word with which the commandment in the twentieth 
chapter of Exodus is prefaced, " Remember that thou keep holy 
the Sabbath day." The end of the institution of the Sabbath 
appears from Genesis, (ii, 2, 3.) The rest of this day was to be a 
symbolical profession that all things were created by God, and 
that to Him praise and worship were due. Hence we rind that 
under the law the profanation of this day was capitally punished, 
because it was looked upon as a public denial of the holy union 
which existed between the Hebrews and the Creator of all 



OF SACRED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



347 



things. Another end, subordinate to this, in the institution of 
the Sabbath, was that men, particularly slaves, might recover 
strength by the rest of this day, and might consequently be 
induced to rejoice in the goodness and clemency of God. 
(Exod., xxiii, 12.) As to the things which were to be omitted 
on the Sabbath day, it is to be observed that the very name 
Sabbath, which signifies rest, indicates that on this day labours 
were to be interrupted, which thing indeed is often expressly 
repeated. (Exod., xx, 10; xxxi, 14-17; xxxv, 1-3; Deut., 
v, 12-14.) We find special mention made of the gathering of 
the manna, and the lighting of a fire, as things prohibited on this 
day, but we have no detailed specification of the things which 
were not to be done on the Sabbath. However, first, we must 
not reckon among these the use of arms in war, as the more 
modern Jews supposed. Second, neither was the healing of a 
sick man forbidden, nor the taking of medicines, as some Jewish 
doctors in the time of our Redeemer, and others in the Talmud, 
have asserted. [Neither was it forbidden to pull some ears of 
corn to satisfy hunger. Nor was any work of necessity prohi- 
bited, such as to give food to cattle, or to take them up when 
they had fallen into the ditch. (Matt., xii, 1-15 ; Luke, vi, 1-5 ; 
xiii, 10-17; Mark, iii, 2 ; John v, 1; ix, 1-34.) The Sabbath 
day's journey mentioned in the New Testament was not defined 
by the law, but by the rabbins ; it was about a mile, or perhaps 
more. (See Acts, i, 12.) Third, there was no prohibition against 
the performance of sacred rights, or the doing of those things 
which were required for the worship of God in the Tabernacle or 
temple, such as the circumcision of children on the eighth day, 
the slaying and burning of victims. (Levit., vi, 8, and following ; 
Numb., xxviii, 3, and following ; Matt., xii, 5.) 

The Sabbath commenced at sunset, and closed at the same 
time on the following day. (Matt., viii, 16 ; Mark, i, 32.) Hence, 
as it was not permitted on this day to kindle a fire for culinary 
purposes, it was necessary to prepare the food for the Sabbath 
on the sixth day of the week, or Eriday, before sunset, wherefore 
this sixth day of the week got the name of the preparation (?j 

Now, as to the things which were to be done on the Sabbath. — 
These things appear to have been known chiefly from custom. 
The only things which we find commanded in the law are, that 
the priests should offer on this day, besides the daily victims, two 
other lambs of a year old, together- with an offering of flour tem- 
pered with oil, and libations, (Numb., xxviii, 9, 10, ) and that 
the priests should also on this day change the loaves of proposi- 
tion. (Lev., xxiv, 8.) Prom the scope of the Sabbath, it was 



348 



OF SACEED TIMES A2s t D SEASONS. 



to be a day of rejoicing, and hence, sadness on this day is a 
symbol of great misfortune. (Osee, ii, 11 ; Lam., ii, 6 ; 1 Mach., 
i, 41.) It was on this day that the people were accustomed to 
assemble at the houses or dwellings of the prophets to be in- 
structed by them. (4th Kings, iv, 23.) On this day also, in a 
special manner, did religious parents teach their children re- 
ligion, and relate to them the wonderful favours and Divine 
chastisements of the former times, whilst they who were not 
living a great way off frequented the sacred Tabernacle or 
temple. (See Menoch. de Bepub. Heb. y lib. 3, c. i, questi. 3 ; 
Jahn, Archceologia.) 

Second. — The Sabbatical Year. As the period of seven days 
was to be concluded by the Sabbath, so the period of seven 
years was to be terminated by the sabbatical year in order that 
by means of this still longer memorial, the Israelites would be 
reminded of the adoration which they owed to the only true God, 
the Creator and Ruler of the universe. This year began on the 
first day of the seventh month, Tischri. It was forbidden during 
the sabbatical year to sow their fields, to prune their vines, and to 
gather the spontaneous productions of the land. (Exod., xxiii, 
10, 11.) Debts were not to be exacted in this year, but Jahn 
(ArcJiceologia BibJica) censures the Talmudists for asserting that 
these debts were extinguished in this seventh year. The same 
author holds that it was not in this year that slaves were to be 
set at liberty, but in the seventh year of their servitude. (See 
Exod., xxi, 2; Deut., xv, 12 ; Jerem., xxxiv, 14.) During the 
eight days of the feast the tabernacles of this year, the law 
was to be read for the people in the tabernacle or temple. 
(Deut., xxxi, 10-13.) In order to guard against famine in this 
year, God promised a triple produce in the sixth year, that so 
the people might have provisions until the harvest of the 
eighth year would be ripe. (Levit., xxv, 20, 21, 22.) 

Third. — The Year of Jubilee. Seven sabbatical years were 
followed by the year of jubilee, which was thus the fiftieth 
year, as appears sufficiently from Levit. (xxv, 8-11,) and thus 
has the matter been understood by Josephus, Philo, and the 
Jews. Some have contended that the year of jubilee was the 
forty-ninth year — induced by the sole reason that otherwise the 
land should remain uncultivated for two successive years. But 
there is no real difficulty here, for the people, being aware of 
these two years of rest for the land, so long before their arrival, 
could treasure up a supply of provisions from the savings of 
other years : besides, God would add to the abundance of the 
produce in the years immediately preceding. This year com- 
menced on the 10th day of the seventh month, or Tischri, which 



OF SACKED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



349 



was the great day of expiation. The priests proclaimed it 
among the people by sound of trumpet. (Lev., xxv, 8-13; 
xxvii, 24; JNumb., xxxvi, 4 ; Isaias, lxi, 1, 2.) In this year all 
debts were to be cancelled. All slaves of Hebrew origin — even 
they who in the seventh year had got their ears bored, having 
consented to perpetual slavery — were to be released in this year. 
(Lev., xxv, 39-46. Compare Jerem. xxxiv, 7, and following.) 
All lands, as well as houses in the towns and cities of the Levites 
and priests, which had been sold in former years, now returned 
to their original proprietors. (Levit., xxv, 10-13-17-24-28.) 
But we read in Levit., (xxvii, 16-21,) that lands which had been 
consecrated to God by vow, and had not been redeemed before 
the year of jubilee, came not within the provision of this law, 
and, therefore, could not be reclaimed by cheir first owners. 

Fourth. — The New Moons, and the Feast of the New Year. The 
Jewish months being lunar, were calculated from the first appear- 
rance of the moon, when the feast of the new moon, or of the first 
day of the month, was celebrated : for this day, according to the 
law of Moses, was to be a day of special devotion to God, and par- 
ticular sacrifices are prescribed for it. (See Numb., x, 10 ; xxviii, 
11-14.) The priests were to announce to the people the feast of 
the new moon, by sounding the silver trumpets. (Numb., x, 10.) 
Labour was not prohibited on these days, with the exception of 
the new moon of the seventh month — or Tischri, which was the 
first day of the civil year. On this day no servile work was per- 
mitted. (Lev., xxiii, 24-25.) As the commencement of the 
civil year was solemnly proclaimed upon this day by the sound- 
ing of trumpets, it was hence called the feast of trumpets. The 
feast of the new year was also to be distinguished by the oblation 
of certain sacrifices, in addition to those which were to be offered 
upon the other new moons. (See Nuinb., xxix, 1st and following 
verses.) 

Fifth. — Among the festivals of the Jews three were distin- 
guished as the great or chief festivals ; these were the feasts of 
the Pasch, of Pentecost, and of Tabernacles. They were insti- 
tuted as memorials of some of the principal favours conferred by 
God upon the Hebrew nation. The pasch and the feast of taber- 
nacles were celebrated with an octave ; or, to speak in a way 
which may be more accurate, the pasch continued for seven days 
— the feast of tabernacles for eight : the eighth day of this latter 
festival being termed the day of assembly and congregation, in 
Levit. (xxiii, 36.) But only on the first and last days of each 
solemnity was abstinence from servile works prescribed : and 
even on these days all labour necessarily required for the prepar- 
ation of food was permitted. (Exod., xii, 16 ; Levit., xxiii, 



850 



OF SACRED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



7-21-35.) The feast of pentecost had no octave. (Lev., xxiii, 
15-22.) On these three festivals all adult Hebrews were to pro- 
ceed with their gifts to the Tabernacle or temple, where they 
celebrated the solemnity by offering sacrifices, feasting, and 
rejoicing. But now to speak of the particular manner in which 
each of these festivals was celebrated— and first, of the pasch. 
The feast of the pasch. in the Hebrew HD^ {pesach)\ usually 
written by St. Jerome, in his translation of the Old Testament, 
phase, was the most solemn of all the Hebrew festivals. It was 
instituted in memory of the miraculous liberation from Egypt, 
and the preservation of the first-born of the Hebrews, whom the 
exterminating angel spared, whilst he put to death the first-born 
of the Egyptians. The name of the festival in the Hebrew 
signifies a passing ly or over, and it was given to this solemnity 
because at its first celebration the exterminating angel passed by, 
that is, spared the houses of the Hebrews which were marked with 
the blood of the paschal lamb. This solemnity commenced on the 
evening of the fourteenth day of the month Abib, called after- 
wards ^sisan, which was the first month of the sacred year, and 
corresponded partly with our March, and partly with April. 
The feast extended to the twenty-first day of Nisan, inclusively. 
The most solemn days, as has been observed before, were the 
fifteenth of Nisan or Abib, commonly called the first day of the 
pasch. and the twenty-first of the same month — the last day of 
the solemnity. Throughout this whole week unleavened bread 
only was used, and hence it is called the feast of Azyras or of 
unleavened bread. (Exod., xii, 18 ; xxiii, 6-7 ; xiii, 15 ; Levit., 
xxiii, 6 ; Xunib., xxviii, 17.) On the evening of the fourteenth 
day, all leaven was removed from the houses, so that during the 
whole week nothing leavened might even be seen. Wherefore, 
not only the fifteenth of Nisan, but also the fourteenth, may be 
well called, as it is in Eevit. (xiii, 6.) the first day of Azyras; 
because on the fourteenth before evening all leaven was removed : 
and hence it is, that in one place Josephus allots eight days to 
the paschal solemnity, although in reality it had only seven full 
days. On the tenth day of Nisan, the father of each family de- 
signated and set apart the paschal lamb, as it was called, although 
it might be either a lamb or a kid. It was to be a male without 
blemish, and of the first year, that is, not more than one year 
old. On the fourteenth day of the month, between the two 
evenings, the father or head of the family slew or immolated 
his lamb — in the early times at the Tabernacle, and afterwards 
in the temple. The victim being slain, the blood was received 
into a vessel by one of the priests, and by him, or by some other 
of the^priests, brought and sprinkled at the base of the altar. 



OF SACRED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



351 



As to the time between the two evenings it is variously understood. 
Josephus and the rabbins explain it, of the interval between 
the ninth hour or three in the afternoon, and the eleventh hour, 
or sunset. When the pasch was celebrated for the first time in 
Egypt, the fathers of families marked the doors of their houses 
with the blood of the lamb, in compliance with the command of 
God, who was to spare the first-born in the houses marked in 
this manner. The paschal lamb was to be roasted whole ; it was 
then to be eaten with bitter herbs or wild lettuces. Each family, 
whatever might be its number, was bound to immolate a paschal 
lamb; but for the eating of it a certain sufficient number was 
required ; and hence, when a family was too small to eat the en- 
tire lamb, its number was to be filled up by adding persons from 
another family. In the time of Josephus the number joined in 
the eating of a paschal lamb was to be at least ten, and not 
more than twenty. {Jewish JFar, Book 6, c. 9, § 3.) At the 
first celebration of the pasch in Egypt, the Hebrews were com- 
manded to eat the lamb quickly, having their loins girded, shoes 
on their feet, and staves in their hands, i.e., ready for their jour- 
ney : these ceremonies were afterwards omitted. Another 
injunction, however, which they received was to be of perpetual 
obligation as long as the Jewish law continued, that was, not to 
break a bone of the paschal lamb. In this, and in several other 
respects the paschal lamb was an illustrious type of Christ. 
(See John, xix, 36.) The removal of leaven during the paschal 
solemnity was a type of the sanctity of the Christian state. (See 
1st Epist. to Corinth, v, 7, 8.) We have finally to observe, 
regarding the paschal lamb, that whatever remained of it — not 
eaten — was to be cast into the fire, and thus consumed. On the 
sixteenth day of Nisan, the second day of the paschal solemnity, 
the first sheaf of the barley harvest was offered to the Lord, ac- 
companied by a particular sacrifice : this rite was a dedication of 
the harvest to God. (Levit., xxiii, 5-13.) On each of the other 
days of the paschal solemnity, expiatory victims for the sins of 
the people were prescribed to be offered. (See Numb., xxviii, 
16, and following.) 

Second. — The Feast of Pentecost. Erom the sixteenth day of 
Nisan or Abib, which was the second day of the pasch, fifty days 
were to be counted, and the fiftieth day was the feast of pente- 
cost (nev-sxotiry}) which, coming thus, at the end of seven weeks 
from the pasch, is called the feast of weeks, (Exod., xxxiv, 22 ; 
Levit., xxv, 15-16; ISPunib. xxviii, 26; Acts ii, 1.) It was 
celebrated in thanksgiving for the harvest ; whence it is also 
called the feast of harvest. (Exod., xxiii, 16.) On this day the 
Jews presented to God the first fruits of the wheat harvest in 



352 



OP SACRED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



bread baked of the new com. and a portion of the new flour 
(Exod., xxvii, 16 ; Levit., xxiii, 17 : Xunib., xxviii, 26) ; and 
hence, this feast is also called the day of first-fruits. (Xunib.. 
xxviii, 26.) On this day was also commemorated the giving of 
the law on Mount Sinai, which was on the fiftieth day after the 
departure out of Egypt. On this day many holocausts and vic- 
tims for the sins of the people were offered. (Levit., xxiii, 11- 
20.) Pentecost attracted to Jerusalem a vast crowd of Jews 
from all parts. See Acts, ii, where the sacred writer speaks of 
the pentecost, upon which the evangelical law was solemnly 
promulgated to the world. The pentecost, of which there is 
question in that second chapter of the Acts, might well be called 
the day of the first-fruits of the Spirit. 

Third'. — The Feast of Tabernacles was instituted in memory of 
the journey of the Israelites through the desert, where they 
lodged in tents or tabernacles. This shows us whence the 
festival — in Greek 2x?;;c-?;v/a — got its name. The feast com- 
menced on the fiiteenth day of the seventh month v Tischri), and 
lasted for eight consecutive days — the eighth day being one of 
special solemnity. [Levit., xxiii, 34-42: Xunib., xxiv, 12-35: 
Dent., xvi, 13-15. ) The Hebrews during these eight days were 
bound to dwell in tents. ^Lev., xxiii. 42, 43.) But as this 
festival was also to be a time of thanksgiving to God for the 
ip gathering of the fruits and for the vintage, it is therefore 
called the feast of the ingathering of the fruits. (In Exod., xxiii. 
16 ; xxxiv, 22.) During the continuance of this feast they car- 
ried in their hands branches of palm-trees, olives, citrons, 
myrtles, and willows. (Levit., xxiii, 43 ; 2nd Machab., x. 7.) 
During each day of the solemnity they walked in procession 
round the altar with the above-mentioned branches in their 
hands, amid the sound of trumpets, singing Hosanna (save, I 
beseech thee) ; and hence all the days of the feast were called 
Hosanna. But because on the seventh day they went round the 
altar seven times, in memory of the destruction of Jericho, this 
day was therefore called the great Hosanna. The feast of 
tabernacles was one of great rejoicing, and the public sacrifices 
prescribed for it were more numerous than those prescribed for 
any other festival. ^See 2sunib., xxix. 12-39.) In more recent 
times the Jews took occasion, from the 12th chapter and 3rd 
verse of Isaias, to introduce the rite, according to which on each 
day of the feast water was brought from the fountain of Siloe, 
and poured out at the altar amidst great rejoicing. The people, 
it is said, sang upon this solemn occasion the 12th chapter 
of Isaias. particularly that 3rd verse, u You shall draw 
waters with joy out of the Saviour's fountains." This ceremony 



OP SACRED TIMES AND SEASON'S. 



353 



throws great light upon the allusion of our Redeemer in John 
vii, 37. 

Sixth. — Of the Day of Expiation. This was the tenth of the 
seventh month— Tischri. This festival was instituted for the 
expiation of all the sins and irreverences committed by the 
Hebrew people during the course of the year. It was enjoined 
under pain of death to observe this day as a most rigorous fast ; 
no food was allowed from the evening preceding to the evening 
of the festival. (Levit., xxiii, 27-29.) All servile work was, in 
like manner, prohibited under pain of death. On this day only, 
in the course of the year, was the High Priest permitted to enter 
the Holy of Holies. Previously to his entrance he washed him- 
self in water, and put on the holy linen vestments and the mitre ; 
he then conducted to the altar a young bullock, to be offered for 
his own sins and the sins of his household ; and two he-goats to 
be offered, for the sins of the people. Only one of the goats, 
however, was to be slain in sacrifice, the other was to be led out 
into the desert, and there permitted to go free. Lots were, 
therefore, cast to decide which of the goats should be slain. 
(Levit., xvi, 6-10.) This being done, the High Priest was first to 
sacrifice the bullock as a sin-offering for himself and his house- 
hold, and to take some of the blood into the inner sanctuary, 
bearing in his hand a censer with incense burning, kindled at the 
sacred fire on the altar, and to sprinkle the blood with his finger 
upon the propitiatory or mercy-seat, and seven times towards the 
floor of the most holy place, before the ark, to purify it (the 
Holy of Holies) from the pollution it might be supposed to have 
contracted from his sins and transgressions during the preceding 
year. He was then to sacrifice the allotted goat for the sins of 
the whole nation, and to enter the inner sanctuary a second 
time, and to sprinkle it with blood as before, to purify it from 
the pollution of the people's sins and transgressions of the fore- 
going year. After which he was to purify, in like manner, the 
Tabernacle — or the Holy, and the altar. (See Levit., xvi, 11-19.) 
The High Priest, coming now into the court before the altar, 
solemnly placed both his hands upon the head of the live goat ; by 
this symbolical action he was understood to impose upon him the 
burthen of all the sins, transgressions, and prevarications of the 
Israelites. He then committed him to the care of a person who 
was to lead him out into the desert, and there to let him go free. 
This was figurative of the remission of the sins of the Israelites. 
This goat was called the emissary goat, or the scape-goat. The 
goat and the young bullock which had been immolated — the first 
for the sins of the people — the other for the sins of the High 
Priest and his household — were to be burned outside of the camp ; 

2 A 



354 



OP SACEED TIMES AND SEASONS. 



and, after the building of the temple, outside of the city of 
Jerusalem. (Levit., xvi, 20-22, 26-28.) Finally, the High Priest, 
having laid aside the white garments, and clothed himself in the 
usual dress of his ministry, offered holocausts for himself and the 
people, and another sacrifice for sin. (Levit., xvi, 23-25 ; jSunib., 
xxix, 7-11.) It does not belong to our scope here to explain 
fully the typical character of this great day of expiation, or to 
show how its many types found their fulfilment in Christ. We 
may observe, at the same time, that the ceremony of this day, 
in addition to its otherwise typical character, was a public ac- 
knowledgment of the inefficacy of the Mosaic sacrifices to take 
away sin ; because on this day there was a commemoration of 
all the sins of the year, although several sacrifices had been 
offered for these same sins previously in the course of the year. 
(Hebrews, x, iii.) 

Seventh. — Of other Fast Bays. In the early times it was 
usual with the Hebrew people, when troubles came upon them, 
to afflict themselves by fasting. (Judges, xx, 26 ; 1st Kings, vii, 
6 ; xxxi, 13 ; 2nd Kings, iii, 35 ; Isaias, lviii, 3-12 :) but in the 
time of the captivity they introduced new yearly fasts in 
memory of some remarkable calamities : First, the seventeenth of 
the fourth month (Thammuz), in memory of the taking of 
Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. (Jerem., lxii, 6-7.) Second, the 
ninth day of the fifth month (Ab) in memory of the burning of 
the temple and the city by the same invaders. (4th Kings, xxv, 8.) 
Third, the third day of the seventh month (Tischri) in memory 
of the murder of Godolias. (4th Kings, xxv, 25.) Fourth, the 
tenth day of the tenth month (Tebeth) in memory of the 
beginning of the siege of Jerusalem. This fast, as well as the 
three preceding, is mentioned in Zachar. (viii, 19.) 

Eighth. — Of the Feast of Furim, or of Lots. This festival was 
instituted by Alardochai, as we read in the book of Esther. Its 
object was to commemorate the wonderful deliverance of the 
Jews from the cruel designs of Aman. It was to be celebrated 
on the fourteenth and fifteenth days of the month of Aclar. The 
festival has its name from Aman's casting of lots in order to de- 
termine the day upon which the destruction of the Jews should 
take place. The feast of Purini is still observed with great re- 
joicing by the Jews. The entire book of Esther is read in their 
synagogues at this festival, and there is a full attendance of both 
sexes, and of every age, on the occasion. As often as the name of 
Aman occurs in the reading, they clap their hands, stamp with their 
feet, and exclaim, " Let his name be blotted out;" the chil- 
dren strike the forms with little wooden hammers made for the 
the purpose. These days are, moreover, days of great feasting 
with the modern Jews. 



OF SACRED PERSONS. 



355 



Ninth. — Feast of the Enccenia, or the feast of dedication men- 
tioned in St. John's gospel (x, 22), was instituted by Judas 
llachabeus in imitation of the solemn dedications of the temple 
by Solomon and Esdras, and the occasion of its institution was 
the purification of the second temple and altar after they had 
been profaned by Antiochus Epiphanes. (1st Mach., iv, 52, 59.) 
It was to be celebrated every year for eight days, commenc- 
ing on the 25th day of the month Casleu. This festival was 
also called the feast of lights, because the Jews illuminated 
their houses in testimony of their joy and gladness on this happy 
occasion. 



CHAPTER III. 

OF SACRED PERSONS. 

And, first, we may observe that the entire Jewish nation was 
designated a holy 'people. Eor the descendants of Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, being chosen by God to preserve the true reli- 
gion, they were consecrated to Him under this respect, and had 
a certain character of holiness, and of priesthood. It is for 
this reason that it was so expressly enjoined upon them to lead a 
holy life. But the titles of holy people, priestly kingdom, given 
to the Hebrews, had in the latter times, through their own per- 
versity, filled many of them with pride to such a degree that 
they had a sovereign contempt for all other people, and bore 
towards them a deadly hatred, as may be seen by a multitude 
of passages in the New Testament. This sanctity, or rather 
this privilege of being consecrated to the worship of the true 
God, appeared to be inseparable from the title of Israelite. It is 
for this reason that some rabbins give the name of holy, even to 
the most impious kings. 

Second. — Of Proselytes. Proselyte (TlpotstX-oroi) is a Greek 
term which corresponds perfectly with the Latin advena, stranger, 
one who has come from another country.* The Jews gave this 
name to strangers who established themselves among them, 
and embraced their religion, either entirely or in part. Conse- 
quently they distinguished two kinds of them, one of which 
went by the name of proselytes of the gate, the others were called 
proselytes of justice. The first were strangers who had renounced 
idolatry, and made profession of adoring the only true God, the 

* The proselyte is called in the Old Testament, " the stranger that 
sojourns in Israel." (See Ezech,, xiv, 7, according to the Hebrew.) 



356 



OF SACKED PEKSOIs T S. 



fundamental article of the Jewish religion, without the profession 
of which they would not have been suffered among the Jews. 
The Jewish people, however, persuaded that the law of Moses 
was only imposed upon themselves, permitted a stranger to dwell 
amongst them, provided that he abstained from all idolatry, that 
he adored the true God, and, in a word, observed the seven pre- 
cepts which the Jews called the precepts imposed upon the children 
o/JYoe — 1st, to abstain from idolatry ; 2nd, to adore the only true 
God ; 3rd, to abhor incest ; 4th, not to commit murder ; 5th, 
not to steal or plunder ; 6th, to punish the murderer with 
death ; 7th, not to eat blood, or anything in which there is 
blood, such as a thing strangled. A stranger, such as we are 
speaking of, was permitted to pay his homage to God in the 
temple, but he could only enter there through the first gate and 
into the ■ outermost court, which was called the court of the 
Gentiles, hence it was that strangers of this kind got the name 
of proselytes of the gate. It is said that ISiaaman the Syrian, and 
Cornelius the centurion^ were of this number. It must be ob- 
served, however, that all the learned are not agreed that such 
persons as we have described were ever considered properly as 
proselytes to Judaism. Many think that this distinction between 
two kinds of proselytes is to be attributed to the latter rabbins, 
and that during the period of the Hebrew commonwealth only 
one class of proselytes was ever recognised, viz., those whom the 
rabbins call proselytes of justice. These were strangers who had 
embraced the whole Jewish religion, and were obliged to ob- 
serve it as exactly as the Jews by birth, hence they were called 
proselytes of justice, because they had bound themselves to live in 
the sanctity and justice prescribed by the law. The Jews wil- 
lingly received strangers of this sort ; we see even in the Gospel, 
(Matt., xxiii, 15,) that in the time of our Eedeemer, they gave 
themselves great trouble to convert the Pagans and to draw 
them to the profession of Judaism. These proselytes were 
initiated by circumcision, and from the moment of receiving it 
they were admitted to the same rites and ceremonies, and to 
the same privileges, as the natural Jews, or the Jews by descent. 
The rabbinical writers say that baptism also belonged to the 
initiation of proselytes. In comparison with the natural Jews, 
the proselytes were always considered to be of inferior dignity, 
as not being carnally descended from Abraham. 

Third. — Of the Slaves of the Sanctuary. From the time of 
Moses, some Hebrews, guided by a motive of religion, conse- 
crated themselves by vow to the service of the sanctuary, or 
sometimes consecrated a son or a slave to the same service. 
This was the origin of the slaves of the sanctuary, or the sacred 



OE SACKED PERSONS. 357 

slaves. Josue reduced to this condition the inhabitants of 
Gabaon, of Caphira, of Beroth, and of Cariathiarim. (Josue, 

ix, 23-29.) David and Solomon augmented considerably the 
number of these slaves, who, on the return from the Babylonian 
captivity, had a very honourable rank assigned to them, as com- 
pared with the rest of the Jews. The honourable appellation of 
nethinim, which had been formerly used to designate the Levites, 
was given to them. (1st Esdras, ii, 54-48 ; viii, 20; 2nd Esdras, 

x, 29 ; xi, 3). The word D*0\12 {nethinim) signifies given, 
assigned. This class of persons was employed in carrying wood 
and water for the service — at first of the Tabernacle, and after- 
wards of the temple ; or, according to the necessity of times and 
circumstances, they performed other services for the house of 
God. Thus, for example, Solomon may have employed them in 
various works connected with the building of the temple. 

Fourth. — Of the Levites. Although the Levites held their 
office by hereditary right, yet they could not enter upon the per- 
formance of its functions without having received a solemn con- 
secration, which consisted chiefly in being sprinkled with the 
water of lustration in washing and in offering sacrifices. (^N"umb., 
viii, 6, 7, 8.) The law did not assign any particular dress to 
the Levites. Only from the time of David and of Solomon the 
singers and those who played upon musical instruments at the 
solemn services of religion, as well as those who were employed 
in removing the ark of the covenant, wore a robe of fine linen 
whilst engaged in these several functions. (1st Paralip., xv, 27 ; 
2nd Paralip., v, 12.) 

The functions or duties of the Levites were, to keep guard 
or watch at the Tabernacle, and afterwards at the temple ; to 
carry the different parts of the Tabernacle and its several utensils 
during the journey in the desert ; and, at a later period to keep 
the temple perfectly clean ; to administer its revenues and 
treasures ; and under David, and from the time of that prince, 
they were employed in singing and playing on musical instru- 
ments during the solemn services of God. Another part of their 
duty was, to assist in preparing the victims for sacrifice. Finally, 
they were to apply themselves to the study of the Divine laws, 
and it was their duty, as well as that of the priests, to instruct 
the people in the knowledge of these laws. (Levit., x, 11 ; Deut., 
xvii; 2nd Paralip., xviii, 7-9.) They were divided into three 
great families, according to the number of the sons of Levi — 
Caath, Gerson, and Merari- — from whom they were descended. 
These families had the different services of the Tabernacle divided 
among them. The persons whose allotted share of the labour 
was of a more fatiguing kind, such as the carrying of the timber 



358 



OF SACRED PEESONS. 



of the Tabernacle, entered upon their duties at the age of thirty 
and left them off at fifty ; but those who had lighter duties to 
perform commenced them at the age of twenty- five years, and 
having completed the fiftieth year they ceased to serve. (Numb., 
viii, 24, 25.) At a later period they entered on their ministry 
at the age of twenty. (1st Paralip., xxiii, 24-27 ; 2nd Paralip., 
xxxi, 17; 1st Esdras, iii, 8.) In Palestine they were not 
burthened with heavy duties. David divided into four classes 
the thirty-eight thousand adult Levites of his time. He 
assigned twenty-four thousand to the service of the priests ; four 
thousand were to act as watchmen or porters at the several gates 
or entrances of the house of the Lord ; four thousand were named 
singers and musicians ; and six thousand were distributed through 
the several cities of the land to act as judges and genealogists. 
The singers and musicians were divided into twenty-four courses, 
which succeeded one another in turn, the period of the service 
of each course being a week. The porters were also divided 
into small companies, each company performing the duty in turn 
from Sabbath to Sabbath. All the orders and classes of Levites 
were to obey their respective prefects. (See Sumb., third, fourth, 
and eighth chapters; 1st Paralip., twenty-third, twenty-fourth, 
twenty-sixth and thirty-first chapters ; 1st Esd., iii, 8 ; 4th Kings, 
xi, 5.) 

Fifth. — Of the Priests. Only the descendants of the sons of 
Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar were admitted to the office of the 
priesthood. We find that the number of the priests had increased 
so much in the time of David, that he divided them into twenty- 
four courses, each of which was to perform in its turn for a week 
those several duties of the temple which priests alone might 
perform. Of these courses or classes sixteen were descended 
from Eleazar, and eight from Ithamar. Each class was subject 
to the prefect, or head of the family. The class of Jojarib, men- 
tioned in 1st Mac, (ii, 1,) was first in order, and the class of 
Abia, mentioned in Luke, (i, 2,) was eighth. (1st Paralip., xxiv, 
3-19.) This division was ever after retained (2nd Paralip., viii, 
14 : xxxi, 2 ; xxxvi, 24 :) and after the captivity, although only 
four of these twenty -four familes returned, yet the former 
division into twenty-four courses was restored under the ancient 
names. (1st Esdr., ii, 36-39; 2nd Esdr., vii, 39-42 ; xii, 1.) 

The several rites, ceremonies, and sacrifices, by which the 
priests were set apart and consecrated to God, are fully detailed 
in Exodus and Leviticus. (See Exod., twenty-ninth chapter, and 
Levit., eighth chapter.) This inauguration of the priests, which 
continued for eight days, served for a perpetual consecration of 
the order of priests, so that it was unnecessary to repeat it in 



OF SACRED PERSONS. 



359 



the case of those by whom these first priests were succeeded. 
(Exod., xxix, 35-37 ; Levit., x, 7.) We shall see afterwards if 
the consecration of the High Priest was to be repeated in the 
case of his successors. 

The sacred vestments were only to be worn by the priests 
when engaged in the functions of their ministry. It is almost 
impossible to form an exact idea of the manner in which these 
vestments were made, seeing that the Sacred Author, supposing 
that many of them were known by every one from the usual 
manner of dressing at the time, has left us an incomplete de- 
scription of them ; and on the other hand, the description given 
of them by Josephus probably applies only to the sacred vest- 
ments used in his own time. To give some general idea of these 
vestments, we may observe that they included, 1st, linen 
drawers ; 2nd, a linen tunic, which in the time of Josephus 
reached down to the ankles, and was furnished with sleeves 
3rd, a girdle, which, according to Josephus, was richly em- 
broidered ; 4th, a mitre made of linen : originally it rose high 
above the head, and was of a pointed form, but in the time of 
Josephus it had assumed a round or globular form. (See 
Exodus, twenty-eighth chapter ; and Josephus Antiq., iii, 7, §§ 1, 
2, 3.) The priests wore no covering on their feet when engaged 
in their ministry. 

For one to be qualified to perform the priestly functions it 
was not enough that he was descended from the family of Aaron : 
it was required, moreover, that he should be free from every 
corporal defect. (Levit., xxi, 16, 17.) The priests were to ab- 
stain from wine and every inebriating drink during the period 
of actual service in their ministry. (Levit., x, 8-11.) Origi- 
nally, to be admitted to the functions of the priesthood the per- 
son should be thirty years old, (Numb., iv, 3 ;) but afterwards 
the age of admission to these functions was fixed at twenty 
years. (2nd Paralip., xxxi, 17.) Each day the class which was 
in actual service decided by lot what particular functions each 
person should fulfil. The priestly functions consisted in the 
offering of sacrifices, burning of incense, attending to the pre- 
servation of the fire on the altar of holocausts, changing the 
loaves of proposition on the Sabbath-day, &c, &c. 

Sixth. — Of the High Priest. The High Priest enjoyed 
peculiar dignity and influence above all the other priests. He 
alone could enter the Holy of Holies. The supreme adminis- 
tration of sacred things belonged to him. He was the supreme 
judge of controversies. In later times he presided over the 
Sanhedrin, and held the next rank to the sovereign or prince 
His authority, therefore, was very great at all times, but 



360 



OF SACRED PERSONS . 



especially when he united the pontifical and regal dignities in 
his own person. In the scripture he is sometimes called the 
head of the chief priests, because the appellation of chief priests 
was given to the heads of the sacerdotal families or courses. 
According to the law, the pontifical dignity was to be held for 
life ; but this law was badly obeyed at a late period, when the 
Jews were under the power of the Romans. However, it does 
not appear that the law prohibited the deposition of a High Priest 
on account of his crimes, and thus we find that Solomon deposed 
Abiathar. (3rd Kings, ii, 27.) Aaron was the first who was 
invested with the dignity of the high priesthood ; from him it 
descended to his eldest son, Eleazar ; in the course of time it 
passed into the family of Ithamar ; afterwards it returned to the 
family of Eleazar. In a word, it was at all times necessary, 
according to the law, that the High Priest should be descended 
from Aaron through some one of his sons, as the priesthood was 
exclusively confined to Aaron's family. As to the garments of 
the High Priest, these were — First, the simple linen vestments 
which were common to him and the other priests. It was with 
these that he should be clothed when, on the great day of expia- 
tion he entered the most holy place. (Levit., xvi, 4-23.) Se- 
cond, besides these the High Priest had four magnificent garments 
which were peculiar to his own dignity, and which he wore 
over the ordinary sacerdotal vestments ; these were — First, the 
cloak or robe (meil) of violet-coloured wool ; on its hem there 
were seventy-two golden bells, separated from one another by as 
many artificial pomegranates (Exocl., xxviii, 31-35.) It is 
called the robe of the ephod. Josephus describes it as reaching 
to the feet, and consisting of one entire piece of woven work. 
(Antiq., iii, 7.) It was without sleeves. Second, the ephod, a 
garment consisting of two parts, one of which covered the breast, 
and the other the back. These parts were fastened together on 
the shoulders. The fore part of it descended only a little 
below the waist, the back part is supposed to have reached much 
lower down. It was of fine twisted linen, splendidly wrought 
with gold and purple : to each of the shoulder-straps of this ephod 
was fastened a precious stone, on which were engraved the 
names of the twelve tribes of Israel — that is, six names on each 
stone. (Exod., xxviii, 6-7.) Third, the Rational of Judgment. 
(See Exocl., xxxix.) This was a piece of cloth doubled, one 
span square, and of similar texture and workmanship with the 
ephod ; on it were set twelve precious stones arranged in four 
rows, and containing the engraved names of the twelve sons of 
[srael. It was to be worn on the breast of the ephod, to which 
it was fastened. Hence it is called the breast-plate. On the 



OF SACRED TEESOXS. 



361 



rational was also placed the D'HIN (urim), and D^En (thum- 
mim). What these words refer to is greatly disputed among 
the learned ; they are translated from the Vulgate, doctrine and 
truth; literally they mean, illuminations and perfections. Several, 
with De Lyra, Eibera, and others, maintain that they were 
nothing else than the twelve stones of the rational or breast- 
plate, which had these names of urim and thummim given to them, 
in consequence of their being used by God as a means of conveying 
His answer to the High Priest, when consulted by him — that is, by 
means of these stones God illumined the mind of the High Priest 
and showed him the truth respecting the object of his inquiry. It 
is supposed that a favourable answer from God was indicated 
by an extraordinary brilliancy communicated to these stones ; 
whereas, if the ordinary brightness of the stones was dimmed, 
this showed that the answer was unfavourable. Cornelius a 
Lapide is of opinion that these words urim and thummim were 
inscribed on the breast-plate, and that they simply indicated 
that it belonged to the High Priest, clothed with the breast-plate 
of judgment to receive from God true instruction or doctrine and 
truth, respecting the matters upon which he consulted Him. 
(See Cornelius a Lapide on Exodus, xxviii, 30.) It is supposed 
by some that from the earliest time, among the people of God, 
when the Divine counsel was sought for, something was worn 
on the breast, having the words here mentioned inscribed upon 
it, and that it was in imitation of this primaeval institution that 
the custom was introduced among the Egyptians, which is re- 
corded by iElian, from whom we learn that the Egyptian arch- 
judge, who was always a priest venerable for age and learning, 
opened judicial proceedings by suspending from his neck by a 
gold chain an image made of sapphire stone, which was called 
truth. Whatever may be said on this matter, it is certain that 
when the High Priest sought counsel from God he should have 
on the rational, which had the urim and thummim. AYe have 
already mentioned one way in which it is supposed that the 
answers were given ; others think that they were conveyed to 
the High Priest by audible words. Fourth, lastly, the High 
Priest wore upon his forehead a plate of pure gold, on which 
were engraved two words, signifying Holy to the Lord. (Exod., 
xxviii, 36.) This plate was bound upon the front of the High 
Priest's mitre by a blue riband. 

Aaron was consecrated High Priest after the same manner as 
his sons were consecrated priests, except that he received a 
double unction, viz., one upon the head, with which he alone 
was honoured, and the other in common with his sons, on his 
person and his garments. (Exod., xxix, 7-21 ; Levit., viii, 12, 13 ; 



362 



OP SACBED PERSON'S. 



xxi, 10.) Hence, in preference to the other priests, the High 
Priest was called rTES>Dn {hammashiach) the anointed. 

Finally, as the High Priest alone could perform those cere- 
monies which were prescribed for the great day of expiation, 
and as he might on some occasion be prevented by sickness or 
legal defilement from officiating on that day, it became necessary 
to assign to him a vicar — some other priest, who might take his 
place in such an emergency. To this priest there is reference in 
Jerem., (lii, 24,) where he is called the second priest — in Hebrew 
n2t#ftn }rD {Cohen Hammishneh.) 

Seventh. — Of the Officers of the Synagogue. The synagogues 
had not any ordinary preachers attached to them, whose regular 
duty it was to teach the people ; but instruction was communi- 
cated, first, by the interpreters, who explained in the vulgar 
tongue the portion of scripture which had been previously read 
in Hebrew ; secondly, by anyone in the synagogue, who, being 
well instructed himself, was disposed to instruct or exhort his 
brethren. (Luke, iv, 16-21 ; Acts, xiii, 5-15 ; xv, 21 ; Matt., iv, 
23 ; xxvi, 5.) The other officers of the synagogue were — first, 
the chief or president of the synagogue, agxicvva^ayos, who pre- 
sided over the assembly, invited persons to read and speak 
to the people, unless some had voluntarily offered themselves to 
perform these offices with his permission. (Mark, v, 22, 35, 38 ; 
Luke, viii, 41 ; xiii, 14, 15 ; xviii, 8, 17 ; Acts, xiii, 15.) Second, 
the elders of the synagogue, TlpeafivTspoi. These formed the pre- 
sident's council : they belonged to the most powerful and learned 
class of the people ; hence they are also styled a^t^vvayojyoi 
(Acts, xiii, 15.) This senate, that is, the president, with the 
HgzGf3vT£goi, not only regulated the government of the synagogue, 
but also inquired into transgressions of the law, and had power 
to inflict the punishment of thirty-nine stripes upon the trans- 
gressor, or even to excommunicate him. (John, ix, 12 ; xii, 42 ; 
xvi., 2 ; 2nd Cor., xi, 24.) Third, those who collected the alms. 
Fourth, the minister of the synagogue, V7rr}gsr7)s, (Luke, iv, 20), 
who presented the book to the reader, and received it again from 
him, and performed such like offices. The solemn ceremony 
which the modern Jews employ in presenting the book to the 
reader was unknown in the time of Christ. Fifth, the apostle 
or deputy of the synagogue. Of these there were three sorts — 
first, some belonged to the foreign synagogues, and had it 
assigned to them as a duty to bear the alms of these synagogues 
to Jerusalem ; secondly, others were deputed by the synagogues 
as missionaries to propagate Judaism ; in fine, others were ap- 
pointed to recite the public prayers in the synagogue in the 
name of the assembly. 



OF SACRED PERSONS 



363 



The Jews, both ancient and modern, gave the name of 
C s DinD (parnasim), that is, pastors, to those members of 
the synagogue who are distinguished for their wisdom and 
knowledge. 

!We observed, in the commencement of this section, on the 
officers of the synagogue, that the scripture was first read over 
for the people in the ancient Hebrew, and then interpreted in 
the vulgar tongue. This observation is not intended to apply to 
the synagogues of the Hellenist Jews, in which the Septuagint 
version was read. We shall here take occasion to say a few 
words of these Hellenist Jews, as distinguished from the Hebrew 
Jews. "We find the Hellenists mentioned in the Acts of the 
Apostles, (vi, 1 ; ix, 29 ; xi, 20.) This name was given to the 
Jews who used the Greek language as their vernacular tongue, 
whether they dwelt in Egypt, Asia Minor, Greece, or in any 
other part of the world, and therefore they are not exactly the 
same with those called 3/a<wjoga rm WCkipm (the dispersion among 
the Greeks or Gentiles — or "the Jews dispersed among the Gen- 
tiles) mentioned in the following places in the yew Testament — 
John, vii, 35 ; James, i, 1 ; 1st Peter, i. For the Hellenists 
were to be found even at Jerusalem, (Acts, vi, 1 :) and on the 
other hand the Hebrew Jews were also sometimes found dis- 
persed among the Greeks ; thus St. Paul, a native of Tarsus, was 
a Hebrew Jew. (2nd Corinth., xi, 12 ; Philipp.. iii. 5.) The 
Hebrew Jews were those who spoke the Syro-Chaldaic dialect. 
lS T ow, in the time of our Redeemer, they who used this dialect 
thought themselves much superior to the Greek Jews, and 
therefore even when living in foreign countries they were most 
anxious to preserve the Syro-Chaldaic in their families, and to 
hand it down to their posterity as their vernacular language. 

Eighth. — Of the JYaza rites. The Nazarites or Nazirites — in 
Hebrew {Nezirim) — were so called from the Hebrew word 

"ITU (Nazar), which, according to some, signifies strictly to be 
separated — consecrated, and according to others, to maize a vow — 
to keep one's vow. Whatever may be said of the piimitive signi- 
fication of their name, the Xazarites were instituted by God Him- 
self. From the moment when the vow of the Xazarite was made 
— to which vow both sexes without distinction were admitted — 
abstinence from every kind of inebriating drink became a strict 
obligation. The jSazarites also bound themselves to abstain from 
cutting or shaving the hair or beard. Sometimes this vow was 
perpetual, and then these obligations continued for life, but for 
the most part the vow of the Xazarite was limited to a certain 
time. We may observe here that Samson, and John the Baptist, 
belonged to the class of perpetual Xazarites, and were such even 



364 



OP SACRED PERSONS. 



from their birth, having been destined to that state by a special 
dispensation of Providence. When the time fixed by the vow 
of the Hazarite had expired he was to present himself at the 
Tabernacle or temple where the victims were immolated which 
the law obliged him to offer ; then also he was to have his hair 
cut off, that it might be presented to the Lord as a sacred thing, 
and in testimony of his joy and his gratitude to God for having 
enabled him to accomplish his vow. The ceremonies with which 
the Kazareate terminated were performed with much pomp and 
magnificence, and were consequently attended with considerable 
expense. It appears that zealous persons ordinarily charged 
themselves with defraying these expenses when the Nazarites 
were poor. Hence we find the Apostles (Acts, xxi, 34,) advis- 
ing St. Paul to take upon himself these expenses for four 
Ifazarites, in order to overturn the opinion which had got abroad 
regarding him, that he held the law of Moses in contempt. These 
details, and many others besides, regarding the Nazarites, may 
be seen in the sixth chapter of the book of Numbers. 

Ninth. — Of the Reclialites. The Eechabites, who are men- 
tioned with praise in the Prophet Jeremias, (xxxv, 1, and fol- 
lowing,) were descended from Jonadab the son of Eechab. This 
Jonadab was contemporary with Jehu, King of Israel, whom he 
assisted in destroying the impious house of Achab and the wor- 
shippers of Baal, (4th Kings, x, 15, 16-23.) Lamy {Apparatus 
jBibltcus, lib., i, cap. 8) is of opinion that Jonadab merely 
restored the Eechabite institute, which this author traces back 
to Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses : for, the Eechabites 
belonged to the Cineans or Cicites, and were, therefore, the 
descendants of Jethro. (1st Paralip, ii, 55.) The rule of life 
which Jonadab gave to his posterity consisted of these three 
articles : first, that they should drink no wine ; second, that 
they should neither possess nor occupy any houses, fields or 
vineyards ; and, third, that they should dwell in tents. The 
Eechabites adhered faithfully to the instructions of Jonadab their 
father. The scripture furnishes us with a remarkable proof of 
this. In the reign of Joakim, king of Juda, Nebuchodonosor 
having come to besiege Jerusalem, the Eechabites, who could no 
longer remain with security in the country, withdrew to the 
city, without at the same time abandoning their custom of dwel- 
ling in tents. During the siege, Jeremias received an order 
from the Lord to go and find the Eechabites, and to conduct 
them, into the temple to the place in which the wine was kept 
for the sacrifices, and to offer some of it to them to drink. 
Jeremias executed this order, but they refused to drink, saying, 
" we will not drink wine because Jonadab, the son of Eechab, 



OE SACRED PEKSOXS. 



365 



our father, forbade us to drink of it ; and we have obeyed him 
until now : we, and our wives, our sons, and our daughters. And 
when Nebuchodonosor came into our country, we said : come, 
let us go into Jerusalem to protect ourselves from the army of 
the Chaldeans, and from the army of Syria, and since that time 
we have dwelt in Jerusalem." (Jerem., xxxv.) The prophet is 
then commanded by God to upbraid the people of Juda, with 
their disobedience to the commands of the Lord their God, whilst 
they have before them the example of the fidelity of the 
Eechabites to the commands of their father, Jonadab. God 
also promises to reward this fidelity of the Rechabites. 
We may observe here, on the'j circumstance of their being 
admitted into the temple, although not of Jewish descent, 
that this is explained by the fact that they were proselytes of 
justice. The institute of the Eechabites disappeared after the 
Babylonian captivity, unless we admit that the Essenians, or 
Essenes, were really their successors. At least, these latter 
copied after the Eechabites. 

Tenth. — Of the Prophets. Among sacred persons we also 
justly reckon the prophets, who were formerly called seers. 
These being inspired from above, confidently announced to kings 
and people tbe judgments of God and His will, both present and 
future. They were not ordinarily priests, but might be from 
any of the tribes, and were even sometimes raised up from among 
the Gentiles. It was not the only office of the prophets to 
announce future things. To prophesy, in the scripture, means 
also to reveal what happened in times past and to make known 
what is occurring at the present time in a distant place. (Isai., 
xliv, 7-9 ; Luke, xxii, 64.) It was the duty of the prophets, 
besides, to teach the people and to interpret the law of God. 
They also sang the praises of God in spiritual hymns and 
canticles, and they were the inspired writers of His word. In 
one word, they were a class of teachers of the people, or doctors 
who were themselves taught by God. TTe shall not dwell upon 
the names of the many prophets who were sent by God, before the 
coming of the Messias, for the instruction and consolation of the 
people. It does not belong to our province here to speak of 
the prophets of the New Law, who are mentioned by St. Paul 
in his First Epistle to the Corinthians. (See the fourteenth chap- 
ter of that Epistle.) 



366 



OE SACKED THINGS. 



CHAPTER IV. 

OF SACRED THINGS. 

And First. Of Sacrifices. 

A sacrifice is defined to be " an external oblation of a 
sensible thing, made to God alone, by a lawful minister, to 
acknowledge His supreme dominion, the oblation being accom- 
panied with the destruction, or at least the change, of the 
thing offered." 

The usage of offering sacrifice in the worship of God, goes 
back to the beginning of the world. This appears from the 
sacrifices of Cain and Abel, then of Noe, Abraham, Melchise- 
dech, Jacob, &c. jS"o doubt it appears natural that men grateful 
for the gifts of God should offer some of these gifts in testimony 
of their gratitude to Him to whom they stood indebted for them 
all ; but it is hardly credible that in the beginning of the world 
God would have abandoned to human invention the form of 
external worship. It appears far more probable that God made 
known by revelation this mode of worship by sacrifice. Above 
all, one does not see the ground upon which to rest the supposi- 
tion that men would have naturally selected, as a mode of Divine 
worship, the bloody sacrifices of animals. Guided then by reve- 
lation, men first offered these bloody sacrifices. They were a 
most solemn acknowledgment of the supreme dominion over life 
and death which belongs to God. By them man was reminded 
of the death introduced by sin, at the same time that they were 
all typical of that Great Sacrifice by which the redemption of 
man was to be effected. Hence all these bloody sacrifices were 
to cease when that Great Sacrifice would be offered. And, if 
even the Pagan nations have wonderfully agreed upon the im- 
portance of bloody sacrifices in religious worship, this is to be 
explained by the same original revelation of God, of which the 
tradition, although obscured by several corruptions, found its 
way among all' these nations. 

Numerous sacrifices were prescribed in the law of Moses. 
Their great number is accounted for by a two-fold reason : 1st — 
that a stiff-necked people, prone to idolatry, being pressed down 
as it were by this load of sacrifices, might thus be kept within 
the limits of duty ? and at a distance from the superstitions of 
the Gentiles ; and 7 2ndly- — that there might be many figures of 



OF SACBED THINGS. 



367 



that one sacrifice which Christ was to offer once on the altar of 
the cross, and to continue to offer mystically, although truly in 
His church to the end of the world. 

The Mosaic sacrifices may be considered under a threefold 
view. 1st — according to their matter ; 2nd — according to their 
form and end ; 3rd — according to the time fixed for their being 
offered. According to the matter of sacrifice they were divided 
into, 1st — Moody offerings ; 2nd — unbloody offerings, i.e. oblations, 
in sacrifice of certain fruits of the earth, Such as bread, wheat, 
&c. ; 3rd — libations, or drink-offerings. According to their 
form and end there were holocausts, peace-offerings, and sin- 
offerings. According to the time at which they were to be 
offered, there were the continual or daily sacrifice, the sacrifice of 
the paschal lamb, to be offered at the time of the pasch, and the 
other sacrifices, which appertained to the several solemnities. 

The matter, then, of the Jewish sacrifices was threefold. 
1st — there were animals, viz., sheep, goats, kids, oxen, calves, 
doves, sparrows, turtles. 2ndly — There were fruits, and pro- 
ductions of the earth, viz., bread, flour, salt, frankincense, the 
sheaf of corn, w heat. 3rdly — there were liquids, viz., blood, 
wine, oil, water. Such was the determined matter of sacrifice ; 
beyond these things nothing could be offered in sacrifice. 

The manner of offering was different in this triple matter : 
animals generally were slain, and at least in part, burnt : we 
say generally, for, the emissary goat was an exception. As for 
bread, flour, &c, some change was effected in the manner of 
their existence and, finally, effusion took place in the offering 
of liquids. As to the form and end, the Mosaic sacrifices were 
also threefold : first, the holocaust ; second, the sin-offering ; 
third, the peace-offering. The holocaust was the most perfect 
kind of sacrifice: because in it the whole thing offered was 
burned, and thus consumed in honour of God ; so that no part of 
it went to the use of man. By this was signified that all things 
belong to God and are to be referred to His honour. And it was 
for this end chiefly that this kind of sacrifice was instituted : 
although it could be sometimes offered also for the sin of the 
people and of the priests. The holocaust is termed in Hebrew, 
rhv (Jiolali) which word signifies that which ascends. The sacri- 
fice for sin, or sin-offering was partly burned, and partly went 
to the use of the priests, who ate of it in the court of the temple. 
It was to be offered for certain external sins, and for sins com- 
mitted through ignorance, or negligence about the ceremonies of 
the law (Levit., iv, 1st and following ; and v, 1) ; also for the 
sin of theft, of perjury, of calumny. (Levit., vi, vii.) Finally, 
as there were different sins, and different persons who sinned, so 



368 



OF SACKED THINGS. 



also there were different sacrifices for sin. For, one sacrifice 
was offered for perjury, for example, and a different one for 
other sins. In like manner one sacrifice was offered for the High 
Priest, a different sacrifice for the king, a different one for the 
synagogue, (the Jewish church,) or the people generally, and a 
different one for private persons. In a previous chapter, (on the 
punishments mentioned in scripture,} we have remarked upon the 
distinction which the law makes between what we call trespass- 
offerings and sm-offerings, the oblatio pro delicto and oblatio pro 
peccato of the Vulgate. The peace-offering could he offered on a 
twofold title ; first, in thanksgiving for favours received from 
God ; second, to obtain new favours from Him. It was divided 
into three parts, one of which was burned in honour of God, 
another went to the use of the priests, and the third to the use 
of those who offered the sacrifice. 

The sacrifices offered by the Hebrews at the sanctioning of 
leagues or covenants deserve to be specially mentioned, on ac- 
count of their typical reference to the Great Sacrifice by which 
the New Testament or covenant was sanctioned. This Hebrew 
custom of confirming leagues by sacrifice was not peculiar to this 
people : almost all the ancient nations did the same. And this 
usage, so general, may be accounted for in the same way as we 
just now accounted for the practice, which so generally existed, 
of worshipping God by the bloody sacrifices of animals. (See the 
commentators on the ninth chapter of St. Paul's Epistle to the 
Hebrews.) 

We may observe, that all animals which laboured under any 
defect whatever were unfit for sacrifice. (Levit. xxii.) 

The unbloody offering is usually termed in Hebrew nn2D 
(mincha,) the word used by the prophet Malachy, when speak- 
ing of the Eucharistic sacrifice in the JNTew Law. (Mai. i, 11.) 

Libations or drink-offerings went with the other sacrifices — 
bloody and unbloody — as an accompaniment. We may here ob- 
serve how beautifully, according to the true Catholic doctrine, we 
behold fulfilled in the sacrifice of Christ all the types contained 
in this variety of legal sacrifices. Christ offering Himself upon 
the cross fulfilled the type of the holocaust. When Christ is 
offered in the Eucharistic sacrifice, to render God propitious to 
the sinner who is not in a fit state to communicate, then does He 
fulfil the type of that sin-offering in which the priest only com- 
municated — or partook of the offering. When Christ, being 
offered in the Eucharist^ sacrifice, is received by the Christian 
worshipper who is at peace with God, then does He fulfil the 
type of the peace-offering, of which both priest and people par- 
took. Again, Christ, by offering Himself on the cross, fulfilled 



OP SACEET) THINGS. 



369 



tlie type of the bloody sacrifice : in the Eucharistic oblation of 
Himself, He fulfils the types of the unbloody sacrifice and of 
the libation or drink offering. 

As to the place in which sacrifice could be offered according 
to the Mosaic law, we find it expressly prohibited, under pain of 
death, to offer sacrifices in any place except on the altar of the 
Tabernacle, or of the temple. (Levit., xvii, 1-7 ; Deuter., xii, 13, 
14.) If some of the true prophets in ancient times sacrificed in 
other places, this is to be explained by the extraordinary com- 
mission which they had from God' to act in this way. (See 
Glaire, Introduction, torn, ii, p. 610, 611.) And if, before the 
building of the temple, some of the people offered sacrifice in 
other places, it was only ignorance that could render them ex- 
cusable. After the building of the temple, however, the people 
were so frequently reminded of this law that they could no longer 
plead ignorance as an excuse for the violation of it. 

Second. — Of Legal Purification. Legal defilements were not 
sins, except those which were simply prohibited — or, except for 
such persons as the Nazarites, who were bound to avoid all such 
contamination. To neglect, however, the purification of such 
defilements was in every case a transgression against which stood 
decreed the severe penalty of extermination from among the 
people of God. The most of these defilements ceased after the 
lapse of a certain fixed time, provided that the person who had 
been unclean washed his body and his garments. In other cases, 
however, a certain ceremony of purification was prescribed. 
Thus, whoever had been contaminated by the touch of a human 
corpse, or by entering the tent or apartment where a human 
corpse lay, or by touching the bone, even, of a dead man, or by 
touching a grave, was to be sprinkled on the third and seventh 
day, and that by a man who was himself clean, and who, in 
sprinkling the other, should use hyssop, dipt in water mixed 
with the ashes of the red cow : this being done, he who was 
sprinkled washed his body and his garments, and thus, on the 
seventh day, he was clean. Nearly in the same way was the 
tent, the house, and furniture which had been contaminated by a 
dead body, to be cleansed. (See Numb., xix, 12-21.) The ashes 
of the red cow were prepared by a singular rite. A cow of this 
colour was to be selected free from blemish, and one that had 
never borne the yoke — she was brought to the priest, who led 
her outside the, camp or city, and there immolated her in the 
presence of the people. The priest then dipped his finger in the 
blood and sprinkled it seven times towards the sanctuary. Im- 
mediately, in the same place, the entire cow was burned — not 
by the priest, but by some other person — and the priest cast into 

2 B 



370 



OF SACKED THINGS. 



the fire, cedar-wood, hyssop, and scarlet thread. Some third 
person then laid by the ashes for future use, in some place out- 
side of the camp or city. (Numb., xix, 1-10.) The priest — as 
"well as he who burned the cow and he who laid aside the ashes 
— was unclean until evening. (Numb., xix, 6, 8, 10, 21.) 
Among other objects which God had in view in the institution 
of this rite, Jahn supposes that it was also directed against some 
prevalent superstition of the time. Of course, the great end of 
its institution was that it might prefigure the good things to 
come. It was an illustrious type of the sacraments of the New 
Law, by which the blood of Christ is applied to the cleansing of 
our souls. In this matter of legal purification the law dwells 
minutely upon the case of leprosy. The leper who was 
healed was examined outside of the camp or city by the priest 
(Matt., viii, 4; Mark, i, 44; Levit., v, 14; xvii, 14); and, if 
he was found to be perfectly healed, he then was to employ some 
person to bring for him to the priest two live sparrows, cedar 
wood, scarlet thread and hyssop ; then one of the sparrows was 
to be killed in such a way that its blood would be received into 
an earthen vessel filled with water, in which vessel the priest 
was to dip the live sparrow, the cedar wood, scarlet thread, and 
hyssop; he (the priest) then, taking of the water in the earthen 
vessel, sprinkled the person healed seven times and then let the live 
bird go free as a symbol of the man's being freed from his leprosy. 
(Levit. xiv, 1-7.) This rite was also observed in the purification 
of a house which had been infected with leprosy. (Levit., xiv, 
48-53.) The healed leper then having washed his garments and 
his body, and shaven off his hair, was clean ; but it was only on 
the seventh day from that time that he was permitted to enter 
the camp or the city. Having gone through another purification 
after the seven days, by washing his clothes and body, and shav- 
ing off his hair, he was next presented before the Lord at the 
Tabernacle or temple by the priest, and at the same time he 
offered, by the hands of the priest, a trespass offering, a sin 
offering, and a holocaust. The priest, then, having touched a 
part of the right ear, of the right hand, and of the right foot of 
the healed man with the blood of the victim of the trespass offer- 
ing, and having anointed these parts and his head with oil, and 
finally, having finished the offering of the prescribed sacrifices, 
the ceremony was concluded, and the healed man was fully per- 
mitted to mix with the people, and to join with them in wor- 
shipping God in the Tabernacle or the temple. (See Levit. xiv ; 
compare Luke, xvii, 12-14 ; Matt, viii, 2-4; Mark, i, 40-44.) 

Third. — Of the First-born. The first-born of men and of 
animals belonged in a special manner to God. Thus, the first- 
born sons should be presented to God, and redeemed according to 



OF THINGS. 



371 



the estimation of the priest ; the price, however, at which they 
were to be redeemed should in no case exceed five sides ; nor 
should the redemption take place before the child was a month 
old. Ordinarily, the child was redeemed at the time of the 
purification of the mother. And here it is to be observed that it 
is clear from the law, (Exod., xiii, 13,) that it was the first-born 
of the female or the mother, not of the male, that was conse- 
crated to God : and it further appears clear, that it was only the 
first-born male that was thus consecrated, so that if the first-born 
of any mother or female animal were a female then neither that 
offspring nor any other offspring of the same mother would be 
consecrated to God according to this law. The first-born of cattle, 
of goats, and of sheep, were to be offered in sacrifice between 
their eighth day and the end of the first year. The parts desig- 
nated by the law were burned, and the rest belonged to the 
priests. Even when the animal laboured under some defect, and 
was consequently unfit to be offered in sacrifice it belonged to the 
priests. (Deut., xv, 21, 22.) The first-born of other animals, of 
which the ass is taken as an example, (Exod., xiii, 13,) should be 
either killed, or exchanged for a lamb, or redeemed at a price 
which was regulated by the priest. If not redeemed it was to 
be sold and the price given to the priest. Ey this observance 
did the Hebrews testify their thankfulness to God for blessing 
them with children and increasing their flocks. Ey the same 
observance they marked their gratitude to God for the favour 
which he had done them in Egypt in sparing their first-born. 
We see in Deuteronomy that when cows, goats, or sheep brought 
forth more than one at their first birth or litter, the second born 
on such occasion was also to be brought to the temple, and after 
being offered as a sacrifice of thanksgiving was to be served up as a 
banquet. If it had any blemish it could be killed and eaten at 
home. This regulation respecting the second-born of animals is 
inferred by Jahn from the following passages : Deut., xii, 6, 7 ; 
xiv, 23 ; xv, 19-23. 

Fourth. — Of First-fruits. On the second day of the paschal 
solemnity the first sheaf of barley was to be offered at the temple, 
and on the day of Pentecost the first bread baked of the new 
flour. This offering was made in the name of all the people. Eut 
each one was bound to offer on his own part the first-fruits of his 
vineyard, of his trees, of his corn, his honey, and of the wool of his 
flocks. Ey these offerings the people acknowledged that they 
were indebted to God for the country in which they dwelt. 
These offerings belonged to the priests. The second first-fruits 
were to be offered as a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and then eaten 
in a banquet ; and each person was commanded to carry to the 



372 



OF SACRED THINGS. 



Tabernacle or temple a basket of them to deposit it before the 
altar, and to thank God with a loud voice for having given to 
the Hebrews a country so fertile notwithstanding their unwor- 
thiness. (Deut., xxvi, 1-11.) AYe may here observe that when 
nothing further was prescribed regarding an offering than that 
it should be deposited before the altar it was sufficiently under- 
stood that it was to go to the support of the priests. 

Fifth. — Of Tithes. The custom of paying tithes to the Lord 
of the Universe goes back to the most remote antiquity, and pre- 
vailed among almost all the ancient nations. There is question 
of them in the history of Abraham and in that of his descendants : 
hence Moses speaks of them as of a thing well known in his time. 
In the law of Moses, then, it is ordered, that tithes be paid by 
the people to God — their King. These tithes went to the sup- 
port of the priests and Levites. The Levites paid a tenth of the 
tithes which they received to the priests. Only the tithes of the 
fruits of the earth and of trees could be redeemed. It was easy 
to know what was the tenth part of fruits and of corn ; but, as 
deception could have been easily practised in regard to the flocks, 
the Levite who collected the tithe counted the young as they 
left the fold, and put a mark upon every tenth one : and if it 
afterwards became known that a substitution had taken place — 
for example, of a smaller lamb in place of the one marked — then 
the Levite was empowered to take both. (Levit., xxvii, 32, 33 ; 
]S"umb., xviii, 26-29.) "When these tithes were paid another 
tenth part was given by the people, which was brought up to 
Jerusalem and eaten in the temple at offering feasts, as a sign of 
rejoicing and gratitude to God. These are called second tithes. 
And it was commanded that what would be found to remain 
of them every third year should be expended at home on a feast 
s;iven to the slaves, widows, orphans, the poor, and the Levites. 
(Deut., xiv, 28, 29 ; xxvi, 12, 15.) 

Sixth. — Of the Holy Oil. This Oil, which was used in the 
consecration of the Tabernacle, of the ark of the covenant, of the 
altars and all the sacred utensils, and with which the priests 
and the kings were anointed, was composed of oil of olives, of 
myrrh, and several aromatic mixtures. The oil thus composed 
was not to be applied to any profane use. The penalty of death 
would have been the consequence of violating this prohibition. 

Seventh. — Of Oaths. These were, among the Jews, some- 
times voluntary, sometimes exacted by the judge. AYhen the 
oath was voluntary in order to render one's assertion more 
credible, the person swearing raised his hand, or added some 
formula, which although not expressing, positively, an impreca- 
tion on himself if his words were untrue, yet left such imprecation 



OF SACRED THINGS. 



373 



to be easily understood. Thus, when one was known to have 
the intention of swearing, then such expressions as, if I do not 
speak the truth, if I shall not do such or such a thing, would 
sufficiently imply the imprecation. Often they said, may God 
do such things to me, and may he add such other things ; or they 
said, the Lord is my witness, or, by the life of the Lord. When 
the oath was not voluntary, then the judge, or whoever else 
exacted it, dictated the formula of the oath, and it was only 
necessary for the other party to answer, it is true, or, it is so, 
or, thou hast said it. However, we must observe that the formula 
amen, amen, does not always imply an oath. The oath was an 
appeal to God, and the person exacting the oath adjured the 
other, with the express invocation of the name of God, as in the 
formula, / adjure you by the living God to answer ivhether this 
thing be so or not. Hence we see that the command of the Deca- 
logue, " Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in 
vain/' (Exod., xx, 7,) first of all prohibits perjury, which is 
taking of the name of God in vain, that is, in a lie. In Egypt 
it was usual to swear by the life of the king, as we see in the 
time of Joseph, (Gen., xlii, 15,) an usage which found its way 
among the Hebrews in the time of the monarchy. (1st Kings, 
xxv, 26.) The Hebrews also swore by the holy places — Hebron, 
Silo, Jerusalem, and by themselves, or by the life of another. In 
the time of our Redeemer the Jews used several formulas of 
swearing, which they did not look upon as inducing any binding 
obligation upon them, such as by heaven, by the earth, by Jerusalem. 
According to the doctrine of the Pharisees, which they rested on 
most frivolous grounds, such oaths might be violated with im- 
punity. This doctrine our Redeemer overturns in His sermon 
on the mount, showing that these are truly appeals to God as 
witness, and consequently that they are to be treated as such. 
(See Matt., v.) In the early times the Hebrews were very 
faithful to their oaths, but at a later period they gave occasion 
to the prophets to reproach them with their perjuries. After 
the captivity they were for a considerable time remarkable for 
their faithful adherence to their oaths : but they afterwards 
forfeited this character. 

Eighth. — Of Vows. We understand by a vow here an en- 
gagement freely undertaken to abstain from something forbidden 
by no law, or to do something which did not belong to strict 
duty. To this engagement the person who vows binds himself 
by a promise made to God. The vow of Jacob is the first of 
which mention is made in the scripture. (Genesis, xxviii, 20-22.) 
Moses consecrated vows in his law, and declared them obligatory : 
but he put certain limits to them. Thus, he permitted a 



374 



OF SACSED THINGS. 



redemption of vows, and he gave to the father of a family the 
right of annulling engagements of this sort entered into by his 
daughters ; and to the husband he gave a similar right, in regard 
to the vows of his wife. (Levit., xxvii, 1-25 ; Numb., xxx, 2-17.) 
The law did not recognise any vows except those which were 
expressed in words and confirmed with an oath. (Numb., xxx, 3, 
11, 14.) Tows were either affirmative or negative. The affirma- 
tive consisted in promising to God some thing, or animal, or 
person. In such vows redemption of the thing promised was 
allowed, unless the vows were of that kind which was called 
anathema, of which we shall speak just now, or, unless the 
animal was such as could be offered in sacrifice. The negative 
vows were promises to abstain from certain things otherwise 
lawful. Yows of the first sort were called "H2 (?ieder,) a word 
which designates a vow properly so called. The negative vows 
went by the name of ")CM (esar,) a word which signifies a bond, a 
chain, an interdict. Of this latter class of vows the most re- 
markable was the vow of the Nazarite. By the affirmative vow 
one might consecrate to God anything, such as money, houses, 
land, animals clean or unclean ; nay, even one's slave, or son, or 
even one's-self. Animals fit for sacrifice should, of necessity, be 
offered in sacrifice ; unclean animals, or such as were unfit for 
sacrifice, were to be sold at the valuation of the priest, and the 
vower was at liberty to redeem them by the addition of one-fifth 
to the value. (Levit., xxvii, 11-13.) Men who were consecrated 
to God by vow became slaves of the Tabernacle or temple, unless 
they were redeemed. Money, land, and houses consecrated by 
vow went to the use of the Tabernacle or temple, unless the lands 
were redeemed before the year of the Jubilee. Levit., xxvii, 
1-24.) Also, all money arising from the sale or redemption of 
objects which had been vowed to God, was to be applied to the 
same purpose. Of all kinds of vow the D^n (cherem,) or anathema 
was the most solemn : it was accompanied with a form of execra- 
tion, and could not be redeemed. Fields, animals, or even men, 
could be the objects of this vow. And any man or beast thus 
devoted should be put to death : and hence to be made an ana- 
thema, that is, to be made the object of this vow, came to signify, 
to be doomed to destruction, to be accursed ; and in English to be 
anathema, now commonly means to be accursed. This vow could 
be pronounced only against such men as were grievously culpable, 
and in a case where a great example of severity was necessary. 
Thus, in the time of Moses we find such a vow made against 
kingArad. (Xunib., xxi, 1-3.) "When the Hebrews pronounced 
this vow of cherem or anathema, against a hostile city which they 
intended to treat with extreme severity, we find that in such a, 



OF SACKED THINGS, 



375 



case not only were all the inhabitants put to death, but also in 
conformity with the terms of the vow no booty was acquired by 
any Israelite ; the beasts were slain ; what would not burn, as 
gold silver, and other metals, was added to the treasure of the 
sanctuary ; and everything else, with the whole city, burnt, and 
an imprecation pronounced upon any attempt that should ever 
be made to rebuild it. (See the History of Jericho. Jos., vi, 
17-19, 21-24, and vii, 1, 12-26.) Of the negative vows, as we 
have already observed, the most remarkable was the JNazareate, 
or the vow of the Nazarites. As we have spoken before of 
jNazarites, when treating of sacred persons, we shall merely add 
here, that when persons engaged in this kind of vow violated it 
before the time of their Nazareate was finished, they were 
obliged to submit to purifications, to offer sacrifices, and to re- 
commence entirely the period fixed for the duration of their vow. 
(Numb., vi, 9-12.) Similar to the Nazareate was the vow which 
according to Josephus was frequently made by devout Jews in 
his time on their recovery from sickness or deliverance from 
danger and distress. This was — first, to abstain for the space 
of thirty days from wine and attend to prayer ; secondly, to 
shave the head ; and thirdly, when these things were done, to 
offer a sacrifice. This usage illustrates the conduct of St. Paul, 
as related in Acts, (xviii, 18.) The law commanded each one 
to acquit himself exactly of the vows which he had made, and 
everything which was given to God as the payment of a vow 
was ranked with sacred things, which could not be turned to any 
profane or common use without committing sacrilege. 

The formulas used in vowing were simple, expressing the 
particular obligation which the person imposed upon himself. 
If a person consecrated by vow all that he possessed, he simply 
said, " Let all that I have be corhan" that is to say, an oblation. 
In the time of our Eedeemer the Pharisees taught, that children 
by pronouncing this word corban in the presence of their parents 
would laudibly consecrate to God whatever was thus offered, and 
would, by this means, free themselves from the obligation of 
contributing to the support of their parents. Our Eedeemer 
reprobates such doctrine ; opposed, as it was, to the command of 
God. (Matt., xv, 4-6; Mark, vii, 9-13.) 

Mnth. — Of Prayers. The first prayers of man were, we 
may suppose, like his thanksgivings, effusions of his heart — as- 
pirations of his soul towards God. Put these pious movements 
soon clothed themselves in words. We often read in Genesis of 
prayers and supplications made aloud. The Mosaic law did not 
prescribe any particular prayer ; it regulated only the form of 
the blessing which the priest should give to the people, and the 



876 



OF SACKED THINGS . 



thanksgiving which was to he made to God in offering to Him the 
first-fruits of the fields. Meanwhile we see the people in impor- 
tant circumstances sing canticles, and accompany them with 
musical instruments. Nor was it unusual for a Hehrew on such 
occasions to manifest his fervour "by dancing ; thus, David danced 
before the ark. There is seldom question of public prayers in 
the scripture ; but the psalms which were sung in the temple 
must be regarded as such. Mention is often made of private 
vocal prayers, and even of private prayers offered in a loud 
voice. The Hebrews stood at prayers — an usage which was ob- 
served in the synagogues, and which prevailed in the early 
Christian churchy and is still retained by the Christians of the 
East. However, the Hebrews sometimes bent their knees in 
prayer, or even prostrated themselves entirely on the earth. 
They raised the hands to heaven, and struck the breast. The 
ancient Hebrews, like the modern Jews, turned themselves 
towards Jerusalem when at prayer. They had no fixed hours 
for prayer ; but we know that Daniel prayed three times in the 
day. (Daniel, vi, 11-14.) This was, we may suppose, at the 
third, sixth, and ninth hour, which hours were consecrated to 
prayer in the time of the apostles. (Acts, ii, 15 ; iii, 1.) 

Tenth. — Of the Jewish Liturgy. When the sacred writers of 
the New Testament speak of the public worship of the syna- 
gogues, they only make mention of the Sabbath ; however, it 
appears probable that the people assembled there also on the 
festivals when they could not go to Jerusalem. It was not un- 
usual, either, to pray privately in the synagogues. Partly from 
the allusions in the New Testament, and partly from the state- 
ments of Jewish writers, we conclude, that the order of the 
public ceremonies or service of the synagogue was as follows : 
first, the salutation of the people by the minister ; then the 
doxology or offering of praise to God ; then the reading of a 
passage of the law ; after that another doxology ; and then a pas- 
sage of a prophetical book. The reader, in the early synagogues, 
as is done even now, covered his head with a veil, which the 
Jews called tcdlith. "When the reading was from the Hebrew 
feciiptures the reader repeated the passage in the vulgar tongue, 
and explained it for the people. Then, any one who was pre- 
pared to preach might do so, with the consent of the president of 
the synagogue. The assembly concluded with a collection for 
the poor, and with prayers, to which the people answered a?nen f 
as they had done to the doxologies. 

The synagogues having been instituted for the purpose of 
assembling the people together that they might be instructed in 
their leligious and moral duties, the language in which the 



OE S1CEED THINGS. 



377 



people were there addressed should necessarily he such as all 
would understand — the vulgar language of the country : and 
hence, there can be no doubt but the reading of the Hebrew 
Scriptures, which was practised in the synagogues of the Hebrew 
Jews, was accompanied with a translation and exposition in the 
vulgar tongue. In the synagogues of the Hellenist J ews the 
Septuagint version was unquestionably used : and hence, many 
of the Talmudists speak with great praise of this translation. 
The doxologies and prayers were recited in the vulgar tongue : 
however, in these a few Hebrew words were preserved, such as 
amen 9 alleluia, Sabaoth. As far as we can learn from the early 
tradition on the subject, as well as from the allusions to the 
matter in the New Testament, it appears that in the first Chris- 
tian churches the apostles departed in nothing from the outward 
form of the synagogue- worship with the exception of introducing 
the breaking of bread, that is to say, the consecration and distri- 
bution of the Eucharist. (Acts, ii, 42; xx, 7-11 ; 1st Corinth., xi, 
17-34.) In these apostolic times wherever the Jewish converts 
were sufficiently numerous to procure the use of a synagogue, 
there the assembly for the purpose of Christian worship would 
be held. But in places where the Christians had no other house 
of worship they would assemble in the evening at the house of 
one of their brethren. There, in some apartment lighted with 
lamps, an apostle standing in the midst of the priests and deacons 
addressed the people. (Acts, xx, 7-11.) He commenced always 
by saluting them, in terms analogous to our Dominies voliscum 
or Pax vobis. Then came doxologies, lessons of the Scripture, 
followed by commentaries, as in the synagogues. After a pious 
exhortation, and prayers, in which the assistants joined, the 
apostle consecrated and distributed the Holy Eucharist. It was 
in these assemblies that the love-feasts or agapce took place. 
These had for object to cherish a holy love between the members 
of the church, particularly between the rich and the poor. The 
assembly always terminated with a collection for the poor, above 
all for those of Jerusalem. (2nd Corinth., ix, 1-15.) Where 
there was not an apostle to preside at any of these assemblies 
there was at least some bishop or priest to take his place. The 
reader, and he who addressed the people stood, the rest sat ; but 
at the prayers all stood up. The Greeks assisted at the liturgy 
with their heads uncovered, but the Christians of the Eastern 
nations only uncovered the head during the consecration of the 
Eucharist; an usage which is still retained by these Eastern 
Christians. These liturgical assemblies were convened by the 
apostles on the first day of the week, Sunday, or, as it is called 
even in the New Testament, the Lord's day. (Apoc, i, 10.) 



378 



OP SACEED THINGS. 



Eleventh. — Of the Sacraments of the Old Law. On this head 
we shall merely observe, that many of the rites and ceremonies 
of which we have spoken, in this section regarding sacred things, 
as well as circumcision, had the ratio sacramenti, or were sacra- 
mental rites. The several questions concerning the nature and 
effect of the sacraments of the Old Law are treated by the theo- 
logians, and we only refer to the subject here for the purpose of 
pointing to another end which God Almighty had in view in the 
institution of many of these ancient rites. 

As we have said nothing hitherto of circumcision, which is 
so well known as a Jewish rite, we shall here observe that this 
rite was first required by Almighty God of Abraham and his 
descendants, upon whom it was made obligatory under the 
strictest penalties, (Gen., xvii.,) several hundred years before 
the giviDg of the law to Moses on Mount Sinai ; and this for two 
reasons ; first, as a mark to distinguish them from the rest of 
mankind ; secondly, as a seal to the covenant between God and 
Abraham, whereby it was stipulated on God's part to bless 
Abraham and his posterity, whilst on their part it implied a holy 
engagement to be His people by a strict conformity to His laws. 
Circumcision was afterwards incorporated with the law of 
Moses. It ranked among the sacraments of the Old Law, and 
was, for males, the solemn rite by which they were initiated in 
the service of God, according to the Jewish religion. Circum- 
cision is also looked upon by St. Augustine, and by several 
eminent modern divines, to have been the expedient, in the male 
posterity of Abraham, for removing the guilt of original sin : 
which in females, and in those who did not belong to the cove- 
nant of Abraham, nor fall under this law, was remitted by some 
other means. As we do not intend to delay upon this matter we 
shall merely observe, that this opinion of St. Augustine has not 
been received by St. Thomas, nor by the greater part of theolo- 
gians. 

The time at which circumcision was to be administered was 
the eighth day after the birth of the child. It seems to have 
been the practice among the Jews for children to be circumcised 
at home ; nor was a priest the necessary or ordinary minister, 
but the father, mother, or any other person could perform the 
ceremony. The Jews generally named their children on the 
day of their circumcision, but this was not of precept, for there 
are several instances of children having been named on the day 
of their birth. (Gen., xxx.) 

At an early period of the Christian era some adversaries of the 
bible, such as Celsus and Julian, have maintained that Abraham 
borrowed the rite of circumcision from the Egyptians, and that, 



OF THE IDOLATTtY MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTURE. 379 

consequently, the scriptural account of the introduction of this 
observance falls to the ground. Several modern writers have 
followed in the track of these, although not professing the same 
disregard for the sacred writings. But all these statements are 
ably refuted by the learned Bergier [Bictionnaire de Theologie — 
Art. Cir concision) who proves that circumcision was not intro- 
duced by Abraham in imitation of any pre-existing custom, and 
that therefore if we find that some ancient Gentile peoples prac- 
tised anything like the Jewish rite of circumcision we are to con- 
clude that the idea of such a religious observance passed from 
the descendants of Abraham to these peoples. This conclusion 
is strikingly confirmed by what Josephus relates (Antiquity i, 12), 
viz., that the Ismaelite Arabs inhabiting the district of Naba- 
thsea were circumcised after their thirteenth year : this must be 
connected with the tradition which no doubt existed among them 
of the age at which their forefather Ismael underwent the rite. 
(Gen., xvii, 2 5. ) 



CHAPTEE Y. 

OE THE IDOLATRY MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTURE. 

First. — As to the Sin of Idolatry among the Helrews. Since 
the scripture so often speaks of this sin to which the Hebrews 
were exceedingly prone for a long period of their history, we 
cannot dispense ourselves from saying something of Idolatry in 
general, and of the false gods in particular, which were from 
time to time the objects of Israelitish worship. 

Second. — On the Causes of Idolatry. The holy doctors of 
the church have remarked with reason, that idolatry was intro- 
duced into the world by the corruption of the heart of man, that 
is to say, his pride, his disorderly love of pleasure and of in- 
dependence. Thus : as long as man attended to the primitive 
tradition, he guarded himself against idolatry ; but, as soon as 
he had banished from his mind the thoughts of the Creator, and 
began blindly to follow the desires of a depraved heart, he at 
the same time began to contrive for himself deities conformable 
to his inclinations ; deities incapable of restraining him by fear, 
or inspiring him with any respect for their authority. He then 
created for himself a false religion and unjust laws. Restrained 
on one hand by the idea of a God which he could not entirely 
efface from his heart, and, on the other hand, seduced by the 



380 



OF THE IDOLATRY 



love of liberty, he transferred to sensible and fleeting objects 
the worship and adoration which he owed to the Almighty alone. 
Preserving a vague notion of the sovereign good; and of the 
supreme beauty, wisdom, and power, as of so many attributes 
peculiar to the Deity, he foolishly gave the name of God to 
things in which he supposed that he had discovered some feeble 
traces of these excellent qualities. Thus the sun, moon, and 
stars, the elements of fire, water, air, earth, and the winds be- 
came successively the objects of his worship ; from these he soon 
passed to rivers and fountains ; and to animals — both the useful 
and the noxious. In his extravagance he acknowledged neither 
limit nor measure ; he offered incense to everything which 
entered his mind — the trees, stones, metals, the members even 
of the human body ; in fine, to the most shameful passions ; for, 
impure love was adored under the name of Yenus, intemperance 
and drunkenness under the name of Bacchus, and vengeance 
and ambition under that of Mars. As to the worship of men, 
without examining whether it was anterior or subsequent to that 
of animals and of the elements of nature, we shall merely observe, 
that several peculiar causes may have contributed to the intro- 
duction of this particular species of idolatry. Thus, for example, 
it may have sprung in one instance from the love of a wife for 
her husband ; and again, from the love of a husband for his wife. 
The author of the book of Wisdom, (xiv, 15,) points out to us 
another source of it : it is the love of a father for a son whom 
death had snatched away in a tender age; this afflicted father causes 
an image of his son to be made, to which he pays divine honours. 
Again, the misguided affection of children for their parents has 
not a little contributed to the spread of idolatry. Finally, the 
fear of living kings, or the esteem for deceased ones ; here an 
undue love tor a benefactor, there a base adulation, have led to 
the deifying of good and of wicked princes. But all this worship 
of men, and all the other species of idolatry, were alike based 
upon the corruption of the human heart. 

Third. — Of the Origin and Progress of Idolatry. At what time 
idolatry commenced, and by what steps it arrived at its ultimate 
height, are questions very difficult of solution. It is admitted, 
however, by commentators, that this sin existed before the 
deluge, and that it was one of those crimes which brought upon 
the world that dreadful scourge. The idea which the scripture 
as well as profane authors gives us of the ancient giants, as being 
men remarkable for their insolence, pride, and extreme corrup- 
tion, appears to justify this opinion. The scripture says clearly 
enough, (Josu., xxiv, 2-14.) that the ancestors of the Israelites 
were at one time engaged in the worship of idols, and it notices 



MENTIONED IX THE SCKIPTFEE. 



381 



particularly Thare, the father of Abraham and of Nachor. This 
shows us that idolatrous worship must have been very ancient 
in the world, since it had made such progress at so early a period. 
Josephus appears to say, that this evil had become general before 
the time of Abraham, since he affirms that that patriarch was 
the first in those times who dared to say that there is but one 
God, and that the whole universe is the work of His hands. 
(Joseph., Antiq., i, 7.) The family of jSachor, who dwelt be- 
yond the Euphrates, persisted in the ancient superstition. The 
fact of Eachael having stolen away her father's idols, (the Tera- 
phim,) proves that these idols were adored in his family. (Genes., 
xxxi, 19.) It is moreover indisputable, that idolatry reigned in 
Abraham's native country. (See Judith, v, 6, and following.) 

But, without stopping to enquire further into the origin of 
idolatry, one thing appears obvious, viz. — that the Hebrews 
during their stay in Egypt were corrupted by the evil example 
of that nation, and contaminated themselves with this crime. 
This appears by the many and stringent laws enacted by Hoses 
against idolatry, as well as by the facility with which they fell 
into this crime in the desert, by worshipping the golden calf. 
These same laws of Moses abundantly prove that idolatry was 
then long established and deeply rooted among the Egyptians, 
the Chanaanites, the Madianites, and the Moabites. The inter- 
val which elapsed from Moses to the captivity of Babylon was 
marked by numerous acts of idolatry on the part of the Hebrew 
people ; nay, one might almost say, that during that period it 
never ceased, although throughout every portion of the time, 
God counted a number, more or less considerable, of true adorers. 
But, during the captivity and ever after, the Jews were remark- 
able for the constancy with which they avoided this sin ; and if 
the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes witnessed the defection of 
some from the faith, in consequence of the persecution of this 
tyrant, still this defection was neither general nor of long dura- 
tion ; whilst, at the same time, the true religion was rendered 
illustrious by the constancy and glorious death of its martyrs. 
(1st Mac, ii, 23-48 ; 2nd Mac, vii.) 

Fourth. — Of the Practices of the Idolatrous Worship. In the 
first place, altars were erected to the false gods. (Deut., vii, 3 ; 
xii, 2.) Among the Greeks, the altar of the JDii ccelestes or 
celestial deities, were twenty-two cubits in height ; those of the 
Earth, of Yesta, and of Mars, were not so high ; and those of the 
demi-gods or heroes were lower still ; whilst to the infernal gods 
and nymphs, sacrifice was offered in pits and caverns. To these 
altars were added images of the gods, which were at first shape- 
less trunks of trees, and stones. In progress of time, these 



382 



OF THE IDCLATBT 



images were formed more elaborately, and sometimes of colossal 
size : at first they were made of wood, soon after of stone and 
of ivory, and finally fused from metal. The images made of 
wood and of stone, were covered with plates of gold or silver, or 
dressed out in precious garments. ("Numb., xxxiii. Dent., iv, 27 ; 
v, 25. Judges, xvii, 4. Jerern., x, 9.) Already, in the time of 
Hoses, images of this kind were to be seen — of men, of women, 
of quadrupeds, birds, insects, fishes, and of the sun, of the moon 
and stars. (Exod., xx, 4, 5. Deut., iv, 16, 18 ; v, 8, 9.) Some 
of these images were compounded of the form of a man and that 
of some other animal : thus, among the Philistines, the idol 
Dagon, is supposed to have resembled a woman in one part, and 
a fish in another part. These statues the common people sup- 
posed to be so many divinities : there were others who looked 
upon them as, at least, the seats in which the divinities resided 
and gave out their oracles. These idols were at first protected 
against the injuries of the weather by means of a roof supported 
on pillars ; afterwards walls were added as a further protection. 
From these beginnings temples arose. The temple consisted of 
two chambers, one of which {the adytum) was, more sacred and 
more secret than the other. The temple was small, but it was 
surrounded by a large open court, in which the altar was placed, 
and where the people assembled. The temples also had their 
treasures, and some of them in the eastern countries were pro- 
tected by a tower. (Judg., ix, 4, 46.) However, altars were 
sometimes built without any temple attached to them : on these 
were inscribed the names of the particular divinities to which 
they were dedicated. To such an altar does St. Paul refer in 
Acts, (xvii, 23.) As in the beginning men worshipped the idols 
under the open air, therefore were those places which were 
shaded by trees and groves selected for this worship : and even 
afterwards, when temples were built, groves were planted about 
them ; particularly when impure abominations were considered 
agreeable to the divinity to whom the temple was consecrated, 
as was most commonly the case. We find that the Hebrews are 
forbidden to imitate the superstition of the Gentiles, by planting 
trees around the sanctuary, (Deut., xii, 2 ; xvi, 21 ;) whilst they 
are commanded to cut down and burn the groves of the Chanaan- 
ites. (Deut., vii, 5 ; xii, 3.) These temples were served by 
priests and priestesses, who, among the Greeks, had their heads 
bound with garlands whilst they ministered : the victims also, 
and the altar upon which they were sacrificed, were in like 
manner decked out with flowers. These priests and priestesses 
also pointed out to the people how the divinity of the temple 
was to be honoured,, and they delivered oracles, (See Acts, xiv, 



MENTIONED IN THE SCE1PTURE. 



383 



13.) Purity of life, or the advancement of morality, was not 
sought for by the worship of the false gods ; what men looked for 
was some temporal benefit, or the acquisition of some extraordi- 
nary knowledge by means of the oracles ; or, they intended to 
return thanks for such favours when they supposed that they 
had obtained them through their idols. They supposed that by 
sacrifices of atonement the most atrocious crimes would be 
expiated, without any amendment of life ; nay, they even con- 
verted horrible crimes into a part of the worship of the gods ; 
nor is this wonderful, since they looked upon the gods themselves 
as unchaste and addicted to several vices. The chief parts 
of this worship, were — First, offerings of victims ; offerings of 
meal or flour mixed with salt ; of libations of honey and in- 
cense. The offerer was to present himself at the altar, after 
washing himself and his garments. The victims were different 
for the different divinities ; in all cases they should be free from 
every blemish and defect. Omens were sought for by the in- 
spection of their intestines, particularly the liver. But not only 
animals, but even by almost all nations, men were immolated to 
the gods. Among the Chanaanites especially, the children of 
the most noble families were sacrificed. (Levit., xviii, 21 ; xx, 
1, 9, 14.) Libations of wine were not only poured upon the 
victim between its horns, but were also frequently offered apart 
by themselves, in which cases they were poured upon the earth. 
We have already observed that the Jewish sacrifices were also 
accompanied with libations ; but there was this difference be- 
tween the Jewish worship and the idolatrous rite, that among 
the Jews the libation was poured on the victim after its immo- 
lation ; whereas in the Pagan sacrifices, the libation immediately 
preceded the immolation of the victim. Hence it is to this latter 
right that St. Paul refers, when he thus announces to Timothy 
the near approach of his death — " I am now poured upon, {Ego 
jam delihor. Vulg.,) and the time of my dissolution is at hand." 
The Rhemish translates, "I am ready to be sacrificed, &c." 
(2nd Tim., iv, 6.) Second, another part of the worship consisted 
in prayers, during which the hands and knees of the idols were 
usually kissed or embraced. In the formularies of prayer they 
took most particular heed that nothing should be omitted or pro- 
nounced wrong, and that no name of the divinity, nor any honour- 
able mode of addressing him should be passed over; for want of at- 
tention to any of these things they supposed would render the 
prayer inefficacious. Thus we are informed by Pliny and Valerius 
Maximus, as quoted by Jahn. Wherefore, the prayers were 
pronounced syllable by syllable, and the words and syllables 
were often repeated. To this practice of the idolators does our 



384 



OF THE IDOLATRY. 



Eedeenier refer. (Matt., vi, 7.) At prayer they often lacerated 
their bodies, or leaped about the altar, calling npon the idol 
with loud shouts. (3rd Kings, xviii, 26-29.) Third, in honour 
of the idols or false gods, they also celebrated festivals with 
sacrifices, banquets and plays. Lustrations were also in use 
among the idolaters. These were made by water, blood, fire, 
sulphur, and were regarded as a complete expiation for all 
crimes. Often, in fine, the most abominable excesses of im- 
purity formed a part of the idolatrous worship. 

The art of divination has been always held in great esteem 
among the idolaters. There were several kinds of divination ; 
First. — That practised by the C^t^m {chartummim.) (Gen., 
xli, 8.) To this class (the char turn num.) belonged the Egyptian 
Alagi, of whom there is question in Exod. (vii, 11, &c.) We 
find the chartummim mentioned in Daniel, (i, 20, &c.,) where 
the name designates the wise men of Babylon, who made pro- 
fession of interpreting dreams. This class of diviners then laid 
claim to a profound and mysterious knowledge, by means of 
which they professed to work wonders. Second. — Necromancy ; 
which was so severely forbidden by the law of Closes, that every 
necromancer was to be stoned. (Levit., xx, 27.) These diviners 
pretended to evoke the dead, and to make them speak. Third. — 
Astrology, which sought presages in the stars and heavenly 
bodies. Fourth. — The art of charming serpents, so much prac- 
tised, even at the present day, in the East. 

The Romans particularly distinguished themselves by the 
excess to which they carried divination. For them everything 
was an omen : monsters, comets, the eclipses of the sun and of 
the moon, meteors, the bellowing of oxen, the flight of birds, the 
sneezing of a man, the tingling of the ears, the meeting with 
certain men or animals. 

The Eastern nations placed great confidence in divination by 
arrows ; and they attached great importance to dreams ; but the 
oracles of the priests held a higher place in their estimation than 
any of these things, and they never failed to consult them before 
undertaking a military expedition. 

Fifth. — Of False Gods in General. At first, as we have 
already observed, the idols which represented the false gods, and 
were themselves worshipped as gods, were merely shapeless 
trunks of trees or huge stones : afterwards statues were intro- 
duced, representing men, women, or animals of all kinds. The 
Bible mentions two kinds of images used for purposes of 
idolatry : First, one kind, which although intended to represent 
Jehovah was used for idolatrous purposes, the people worship- 
ing the image itself as God. To this class belonged : First, the 



MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTTJKE. 



585 



golden calf mentioned in Exodus (xxxii, 4, 5.) Second, the 
two calves — that is, images of these animals — set up by Jero- 
boam in the cities of Bethel and of Dan. The Israelites, during 
their sojourn in Egypt, had long been witnesses of the attach- 
ment of the people of that country to the worship of the calf-idol. 
It was really in imitation of this Egyptian idolatry that the 
people received with such approbation the golden calf mentioned 
in Exodus, and the images of the calves which Jeroboam set up 
in his new kingdom of Israel : although it was alleged by the 
framers of these idols that they represented the true God — 
Jehovah. Third, To this class also belonged the Ephod, which 
Gideon made in imitation of the Ephod of the High Priest, and 
which he placed in the city of Ephra. (Judg., viii, 27.) Finally, 
Jahn assigns to the same class the image made by Michas on 
Mount Ephraim. (See Judges, xvii, 3, 13 ; and xviii, 3, and fol- 
lowing.) The other kinds of images used by idolators were 
those which were expressly intended to represent the false gods. 
The great mass of the idolaters, as we have remarked before, 
looked upon the images themselves as so many divinities. 
Many are the false gods of which the scripture makes mention : 
of these we shall now say a few words. 

Sixth. — Of False gods in particular. First. — The host of 
heaven — that is, the stars, had their adorers and idols in several 
countries, even from the time of Moses. This worship was 
spread throughout almost the entire East ; and the Hebrews, 
forgetful of their law, held it in great honour, particularly dur- 
ing the last hundred and seventy years before the destruction of 
Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. Many altars, dedicated to the 
stars, then existed in Palestine, and incense was burned in their 
honour on the tops of the houses. (4th Kings, xvii, 16 ; xxi, 3; 
xxiii, 4-5.) 

Second. — Baal, a generic name signifying Master, Lord, was 
used to designate all the divinities or false gods of the peoples 
who spoke Hebrew, Phenician, Chaldean, and Syriac. It is for 
this reason that we sometimes meet with the plural D^b^D 
{Baalim). To distinguish between these divinities another name 
was ordinarily added to Baal : thus, Baalberith, or master of the 
league, was honoured by the Sichemites ; Baahebub, that is, 
Lord of the flies-, was worshipped by the people of Accaron ; 
Baal Pehor, or Beelphegor, which resembled the priapus of the 
Greeks, had its abominable worship established among the 
Moabites. In Israel, for distinction sake, the name Baal was 
given to that pagan divinity which was considered the first and 
greatest of those that were adored in the land of Chanaan by its 
Gentile inhabitants. "What we principallv know from the scrip- 

2 c 



386 



OF THE IDOL^TKY 



ture regarding this false god is, that it was worshipped by the 
Chanaanites, that human victims were offered to it ; and that its 
altars were placed upon hills and on the roofs of the houses. 
The idol of Accaron, above mentioned, Baalzebub, or Beelzebub, 
became so famous, that in the time of our Divine Redeemer the 
name was used by the Jews as one of the appellations of Satan, 
the prince of the devils. (Matt., xii, 24.) We may observe here 
that the word Baal, on account of its signification of Lord or 
Master, is applied to the true God in the prophet Osee. (ii, 16). 

Third. — Bel, which appears to be contracted from Beel, and 
to have the same sense primitively as Baal, was an idol adored 
by the Babylonians as a living person who eat and drank. (Dan., 
xiv, 2.) This is the false god known also by the name of Belus. 
His temple, in the city of Babylon, if we are to judge of it by 
the description which several of the ancients have given of it, 
was among the most wonderful works of the world. This temple 
flourished down to the time of Xerxes, who, on returning from 
his unfortunate Egyptian expedition, overturned it, and carried 
off the immense riches which it contained. 

Fourth. — Ashtoreth, in Greek, Aarapry) Astarte is known in 
scripture not only as a goddess of the Phenicians, but also as one 
of the divinities of the Philistines. It is very generally believed 
that this name, Ashtoreth, designated the moon. This pagan 
deity is sometimes called the queen of heaven, (Jerem., xliv, 17, 
18,) and in the sacred scriptures she is almost always found 
joined with Baal: and we should not omit to mention, that 
under the name of Baal, the sun was worshipped. 

Fifth. — Tammouz : this divinity is mentioned in the bible 
only in one passage of the prophet Ezechiel, (viii, 14,) where 
the prophet says, that God showed him in a vision women who 
sat mourning for Tammouz. Tammouz is here translated in the 
Yulgate by Adonis. 

Sixth. — Molech — or Milcom — or Malcam, called also Moloch, 
was the idol of the Ammonites. The name Moloch signifies 
properly King. It is very generally said that this false god was 
the same as Saturn. In favour of this opinion is principally 
alleged the fact, that human sacrifices were offered to Moloch, 
in the same way as to Saturn. The scripture so expressly for- 
bids the Israelites to consecrate their children to Moloch and to 
make them pass through the fire in his honour, (Levit., xviii, 21 ; 
xx, 2-5,) that there is every reason to believe that they were 
really addicted to this horrible worship. And it is to be observed, 
that to make them pass through the fire means, to put them to 
death by burning. The Rabbins would endeavour to persuade 
us, that the words mean merely to make them pass between two 



MENTIONED ITS THE SCRIPTURE. 



387 



fires without any risk to life, as a superstitious purification ; but 
several references of the scripture to the point in question clearly 
prove the inadmissibility of any such interpretation. At a later 
period Moloch had a temple near Jerusalem, in a part of the 
valley of Ennom called Topheth ; the name of which place is 
ordinarily derived from the Hebrew word in (toph,) which 
signifies a drum ; the allusion being to the practice of beating 
drums whilst the children were being offered in sacrifice to 
Moloch, in order to prevent the cries of these victims from being 
heard by their parents or others. Glaire, however, {Introduction, 
torn, ii, page 685,) would prefer another etymology of the word 
Topheth, according to which it would signify a place of burning. 
In truth, the victims were burned in sacrifice. 

Seventh. — Kiyyoun. The Hebrews in their journey through 
Arabia carried with them secretly little tabernacles of this idol. 
(Amos, v, 26.) Kiyyoun is no other than Saturn : according to 
the Chalclaic etymology of the name, it signifies just ; and we 
know that the reign of Saturn has been celebrated by the poets 
for its justice. The Septuagint have rendered Kiyyoun by 
Remphan, which, in Coptic is the name of Saturn. Amos calls 
this idol a Star and a King, as Saturn was, in pagan mythology, 
a planet and a king. 

Eighth. — The Teraphim were idols having a human form. 
These were the dii penates, or household gods, and were con- 
sulted as oracles, according to what we learn from several pas- 
sages of the scripture. (See among the rest Genes., xxxi, 19; 
Judg., xvii, 5 ; 1st Kings, xix, 13 ; xv, 23 ; Osee, iii, 4 ; Zach., 
x, 2, &c.) The etymology of the word appears to be altogether 
unknown. 

Mnth. — JDagon, derived from Dag, a fish, was an idol of the 
Philistines. It is said by some to have resembled a woman in 
the upper part, and a fish in the lower. We ought rather to 
say with a Lapide, that it resembled a man in the upper part. 
However, this may be, the idol was considered to be of the 
masculine gender, as we know from the fifth chapter of the first 
book of Kings. Indeed since the Seventy mention the feet of 
the idol, several are of opinion that in the lower part it must 
have been furnished with human feet. 

Tenth. — The other false gods, of which there is mention 
made in the bible, are either known to us otherwise, as Apollo, 
Diana, Castor and Pollux, or they are entirely unknown to us. 
In this latter class we may place first the shedim or malignant 
deities ; for, that such is the meaning of CHE? (shedim,) appears 
from the etymology of the word, which the Septuagint and Vul- 
gate have translated demons. We see by the Psalms, (cv, 37,) 



3S8 



OF THE JEWISH SECTS IN" 



that children were immolated to the shedim. Second, Nelo, 
which is only mentioned in Isaias, (xlvi, 1,) and which is joined 
by the prophet with Bel, was an idol of the Babylonians. Many 
suppose it to be the same as Mercury, to whom the Chaldeans 
and Assyrians paid divine honours. Third, Gael, (TX) one of 
the Syrian divinities, is very generally explained to mean good 
fortune, as Meni, is understood to signify Fate. The He- 

brews placed before these idols a table supplied with food. 
(Isaias, lxv, 11.) Fourth. Rimmon, which signifies elevated, was 
adored by the Syrians. Fifth, Xergal, Nisroch, Nilcha%, and 
Tartak, Ashima, Adrammeleh and Hanammelek were the divini- 
ties of the different peoples whom Salmanasar, king of Assyria, 
after having destroyed the kingdom of Israel, sent to Samaria to 
repeople it. (4th Kings, xvii, 30, 31.) Sixth, Xanea, a Persian 
goddess, which some have taken for Diana, others for Venus. 
(2nd Machab., i, 13, 14.) 



CHAPTER VI. 

OE THE JEWISH SECTS IN THE TlttE OE OUK REDEEMER. 

First. — Of the Pharisees. The three sects of Pharisees, Sad- 
ducees, and Essenes, are first heard of in the time of Jonathan, 
the brother of Judas Machabeus. Thus, says Josephus, (Antiq., 
xiii, 5,) where he tells us that the Pharisees attributed some 
things, but not all, to fate ; for, some things they said are in our 
own power, so that they may be done or omitted. The Phari- 
sees had their name from the Hebrew word {Par ash,) separa- 
vit, as if separated from the rest of men by their sanctity and 
learning. They professed a more accurate knowledge than others 
of the legal ceremonies ; and they taught numerous traditions, 
many of which were opposed to the law of God. (See St. Matt., 
xv.) The Pharisees held the immortality of the soul, but they 
believed also in the transmigration of souls. (Josephus' Wars of 
the Jews, book ii, c. 8, § 14.) This will help to explain for us 
how the people could have supposed that our Lord might have 
been " John the Baptist, or Elias, Jeremias, or one of the pro- t 
phets." (^Matt., xvi, 14.) The sect was distinguished for hypo^N 
crisy, and for being puffed up with ideas of their own justice.' 
They were everywhere most hostile to our Redeemer, because 
He publicly reproved their hypocrisy, by which they deceived 
the people. It is to be observed, however, that this character 
of hypocrisy did not belong to each individual of the sect ; we 
may mention as exceptions to it, Mcodemus, Gamaliel, and St. 
Paul himself, who before his conversion was a member of this 



THE TIME OE OUR REDEEMER. 



339 



sect. The Pharisees possessed the greatest influence with the 
people ; this they acquired by their reputed sanctity, their 
minute attention to the ceremonies of the law, and the great 
knowledge which they were supposed to possess, as well of the 
written law as of the tradition of the ancients. 

Second. — The Sadducees. These had but little influence with 
the people, as compared with the Pharisees. They were 
principally the rich among the J ews who gave their name to 
this sect of the Sadducees. The word Sadducees is derived- — 
either from the Hebrew word pl^ (tsedek) justice, because these 
made profession of a rigid justice — or, from Sadoc, the founder of 
the sect. Josephus in the place already quoted (Antiq., xiii, 5,) 
says of the Sadducees, that 4 'they denied fate altogether, re- 
moving it entirely out of the world, whilst they said that all is 
in a man's own power, so that he is the author of his own happi- 
ness — or misery, as the case may be.'' The Sadducees never 
admitted the resurrection, nor the existence of angel or spirit. 
It will, no doubt-, appear strange, that a sect which denied the 
rewards and punishments of another life, should have arrogated 
to itself a character for strict justice. The claims to this cha- 
racter the Sadducees founded upon the extreme rigour with 
which, when in authority, they enforced the temporal sanction 
of the law. The Sadducees rejected all unwritten traditions. 
Some contend that the Sadducees rejected all the scripture, with 
the exception of the five books of Moses, and that, therefore, 
when our Lord was proving the resurrection against them, He 
took the argument from these books. (Matt., xxii, 32.) How- 
ever, others contend that they admitted the entire scripture ; but 
this much is certain, that they impiously perverted its meaning. 
So little was the influence which they possessed with the 
people, that Josephus says, (Antiq., xviii, 1, §. 4,) " They are 
able to do almost nothing of themselves ; for when they become 
magistrates, as they are unwillingly and by force sometimes 
obliged to be, they addict themselves to the notions of the 
Pharisees, because the multitude would not otherwise bear them." 
This sect and the Pharisees were determined opponents of each 
other, but both united to persecute our Divine liedeemer. 

Third. — Of the Essenes. The word Essenes, according to 
Jahn, like their Greek name, Therapeutce, means physicians, 
because these professed to understand the cure, not only of the 
body, but also of the soul. We shall see, however, that the 
Essenes and Therapeutas differed in some small matters. As 
they agreed, however, in the main, we shall first give a general 
description, which will apply to both, and then we shall point 
out these things in which they differed. Eirst, then, both one 



390 



0E THE JEWISH SECTS, ETC. 



and other had all things in common, and were supplied with the 
necessaries of life from a common fund. After a noviceship of 
four years— See Becanus : Analogia Yeteris Noviqiw Testament i 
— they made a formal profession of leading a most upright and 
exact life, for the time to come. They rose to prayer "before 
sunrise. Twice in the day they assembled for meals : before 
and after the repast the priest pronounced prayers. On the 
Sabbath day they assembled in the synagogue, for the reading 
of the scripture and its allegorical explanation, and each of them 
besides, attended to private reading. They had secret, myste- 
rious names for the angels, which they would have thought it 
unlawful to publish at all. Attentive to purity of life, they 
were particularly circumspect in regard to veracity ; wherefore 
they reprobated oaths as unnecessary, and never swore, unless 
on the occasion of making the profession of their order. They 
asserted that slavery was repugnant to nature ; and they dis- 
pensed with the use of servants. Some of them arrogated to 
themselves the gift of prophecy. Whoever had- been convicted 
of any crime was excluded from the society. Their doctrine was 
almost the same as that of the Pharisees. Josephus in the place 
already cited, (Antiq., xiii, 5,) says of the Essenes, that they 
affirmed that all things were in the power of fate, and that 
nothing happened to men but by the decree of fate. Secondly, 
As for the difference between the Essenes and Therapeutse : the 
principal difference was, that the former were Hebrew Jews, 
and the latter Greek Jews, as the names themselves sufficiently 
indicate. The communities of the Essenes were principally to 
be found in Palestine, whereas the TherapeutaB were, for the 
most part, established in Egypt ; and they were more rigid than 
the Essenes, who only avoided the larger cities, but dwelt in the 
towns and villages, and exercised agriculture and the arts ; 
whilst the Therapeutee avoided all inhabited places, dwelling in 
deserts or in the open country, where they led a contemplative 
life. The Therapeutse all led a life of celibacy : whereas a cer- 
tain class of Essenes were married. To conclude now, we may 
observe with Serarius, speaking of these people generally, both 
Essenes and Therapeutas, that the Christian religion could 
reckon many converts from their ranks. (See Serarius, lib., iii, 
Triheo resit, cap. 1.) 

Eourth. — Of the Herodians. This was the name of another 
sect among the Jews in the time of Christ. Its origin could not 
have been more ancient than the reign of the Herods in Judea. 
The name, Herodians, nowhere occurs in Josephus and Philo, 
although frequently in the gospel. As to the author and dogmas 
of the sect writers are not agreed. There are some who think, 



OF THE HABITATIONS OF THE HEBREWS, ETC. 391 

that they looked on Herod himself as the Messias : some confound 
them with the Sadducees ; others, in fine, think that they were 
courtiers of Herod, who, either through curiosity or to please 
their prince, joined the Pharisees in tempting our Redeemer on 
the question of the lawfulness of paying tribute to Caesar. The 
most probable opinion, however, appears to be that the Hero- 
dians were the same as the disciples of Judas, the Gaulonite or 
Galilean, who disturbed Judea in the time of Augustus. He 
taught that the true Israelites as being the people of God were 
subject to no human yoke. His followers were called by some, 
Galileans, because Gaulon, the town from which Judas came was 
situated in Upper Galilee ; by others they were called Heroclians, 
in consequence of that town being within the jurisdiction of 
Herod Antipas. They have no peculiar name in Josephus, who 
merely designates them as the followers of Judas the Gaulonite. 
He describes them as great lovers of liberty, whilst their pecu- 
liar doctrines were akin to those of the Pharisees. From this 
description of the Jewish historian we understand why these took 
a particular interest in the question of the payment of tribute. 

Fifth. — The Galileans and Zealots. According to what we 
have observed just now Galileans was but another name for 
Herodians. The Zealots are often mentioned in Jewish history : 
during the war with the Romans, which ended in the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem, the Zealots made themselves very remarkable, 
as appears from Josephus. These were again, in all probability, 
the followers of this same Judas the Gaulonite. 

This would be the place to say something of the Samaritans 
so often mentioned in the Gospels, were it not that we gave 
their history already when treating of the Samaritan Pentateuch 
and its versions. 



DISSERTATION XVII. 

OF THE DOMESTIC ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS. 

CHAPTER I. 

OF THE HABITATIONS OF THE HEBREWS, AND OF THE FURNITURE 
OF THEIR DWELLINGS. 

Of the Dwellings of the Hebrews : — 
First. — From the earliest times houses of some kind must have 
been built by men as a protection against the rigours of the 



392 



OF THE HABITATIONS OF THE HEBREWS, 



seasons. We read in Genesis that Cain even built a city. At 
the same time caverns offered to the ancient inhabitants of the 
earth habitations at once agreeable and commodious ; for they 
were cool in summer and warm in winter. We know that on 
the shores of the Red Sea and of the Persian Gulf, in the moun- 
tains of Armenia as well as in the Balearic Isles, and in the Isle 
of Malta, certain people had no other dwellings than the holes 
which they made in the rocks, and from which they obtained the 
name of Troglodytes. The mountains of Arabia, of Judea, and 
of Phenicia, were full of this sort of caves, which were sufficiently 
capacious to lodge a great number of persons. We may suppose 
then, that some of the ancient Hebrews occasionally dwelt in 
them. After having served as an ordinary habitation for the 
living, the caverns became afterwards the abode of the dead. 
They furnished, also, a place of refuge against persecution. In 
fine, robbers found them a secure asylum. 

Second. — Of Cabins or Huts. Useful as the caverns were 
they had at the same time many inconveniencies. It was diffi- 
cult to find them constructed as one would wish, and a great 
amount of labour was generally required in order to prepare 
them for a suitable habitation. Hence, we may well suppose 
that the cabin or hut had more attractions for the ancient Hebrew 
people. Habitations of this kind did not require much ingenuity 
for their contrivance, nor was there much difficulty in construct- 
ing them. They were formed by fixing in the ground branches 
of trees in two parallel rows, at such a distance from each other 
as was required for the breadth of the habitation, then bending 
the tops of these branches until they met above, where they 
w ere fastened two and two. Over this framework were thrown 
smaller branches, reeds, skins of animals, or sometimes even 
stones. Thus a commodious dwelling was formed, which, in 
addition to the facility of its construction had this advantage 
also, that it could be easily removed from place to place and re- 
constructed. 

Third. — Of Tents. A still more convenient habitation than 
the one thus described was the tent. This was attended with no 
difficulty in its construction, and was easily carried from place to 
place. At first, it is likely that the tent consisted merely of 
skins of animals thrown over poles firmly fastened in the ground. 
Afterwards woollen or linen cloth was used in making the tent. 
Or rather, after the use of the skins for this purpose had been 
laid aside, the ordinary material was a kind of woollen cloth 
made of goats' hair spun and woven by the women ; such as is 
now, in Western Asia, used by all who dwell in tents ; and hence 
the black colour of the tents. (Cant, of Cant., i, 4.) Tents of 



AND OF THE EURKITT7KE, ETC. 



393 



linen were, and still are, only used occasionally, for holiday or 
travelling purposes, by those who do not habitually live in them. 
This kind of dwelling was at first small, and of a round form ; 
afterwards tents were made of a larger size, and of an oblong 
form. Although the scripture often speaks of tents it yet gives 
but few details regarding this sort of dwelling. The tents used 
at the present day by the nomadic Arabs are justly supposed to 
give a fair idea of these patriarchal habitations mentioned in 
scripture, inasmuch as these Arabian tribes have so faithfully 
preserved their primitive institutions and usages. The Arabian 
tents are of an oblong figure, supported according to their size by 
a greater or less number of poles. By means of a curtain or 
carpet suspended at certain intervals from the roof, the whole 
tent may be divided into so many separate apartments. These 
tents are kept firm and steady by bracing or stretching down 
their eves with cords tied to hooked wooden pins well pointed, 
which they drive into the ground with a mallet. In these dwel- 
lings the Arabian shepherds and their families repose upon the 
bare ground, or with only a mat or carpet beneath them. 

Fourth. — Of Souses. It is to be supposed that houses were at 
first small, consisting but of one storey. In progress of time, how- 
ever, houses of vast dimensions were erected, particularly in the 
chief cities of the more important kingdoms. The art of con- 
structing houses of several storeys is very ancient, as appears 
from the description of the Ark of !Noe. According to Herodotus 
(Book i, § 180) the houses at Babylon had three and four storeys : 
and according to Diodorus Siculus, (Book i, c. 45,) the houses of 
Thebes or Diospolis in Egypt had four, and even as many as 
five storeys. In Palestine, in Josue's time, the houses appear to 
have been still very humble ; a second storey is nowhere men- 
tioned ; this is not, however, a conclusive proof against its 
existence : at a later period it does occur. (3rd Kings, vi, 6 ; 
vii, 4 ; 4th Kings, i, 2.) Before the Grecian style of architecture 
was introduced under the Herods, who appear to have had a 
mania for building, it is a question whether there was in the 
country what might be called a peculiarly Jewish style of build- 
ing. The state of the case appears to be, that the Hebrews, who 
had an opportunity of inspecting Egyptian edifices during their 
residence in that land, would, if the necessity had existed for 
building when they entered Chanaan, have imitated the Egyptian 
houses. However, when they dispossessed the Chanaanites they 
no doubt appropriated to their own use the houses of that people ; 
and afterwards, when a necessity arose for building new houses, 
these would be, we might suppose, according to the plan of the 
old houses to which they succeeded. And even afterwards, when 



394 OF THE HABITATIONS OP THE HEBREWS, 

Grecian taste began to prevail in the country, doubtless many 
characteristics of the ancient habitations were, notwithstanding, 
preserved, such as are still to be seen in the houses of the East, 
particularly in Turkish Arabia, where the type of scriptural 
usages is so well preserved. We proceed now to describe these 
houses, premising that our description regards houses of the better 
sort — as to houses of an inferior kind we can only form some 
idea of them by making the necessary deductions. Houses were 
generally composed of rough stones which abounded in the 
mountains of Palestine, or of burnt bricks, while palaces and 
ornamental buildings were, for the most part, built of hewn 
stones and blocks of marble. Wood was chiefly used as a cover- 
ing for the walls, for flooring, and doors. The stones were 
bound together by means of clay, lime, asphaltum, or pitch from 
the Dead Sea. In the time of our Redeemer the houses of the 
rich were splendid. Herod had then made the people familiar 
with all the magnificence of the Grecian architecture. (See 
Josephus, Wars of the Jews, book i, cap. 21.) The larger 
houses generally consisted of four wings enclosing a square area 
or court. The roofs of the houses were flat, such as are still to 
be seen in the East. These roofs were covered with a strong 
plaster of terrace, and had a slight declivity, which was some- 
times from the centre to both sides, and sometimes from one side 
of the roof to the other. On these terrace roofs sometimes a few 
blades of grass or ears of corn would grow, which the heat of the 
sun would soon dry up. (Isai., xxxvi, 27 ; 4th Kings, xix, 26.) 
The Easterns often go up on these flat roofs, not only to breathe 
a purer atmosphere, to enjoy the distant prospect, or to see some- 
thing which has happened in the vicinity ; but also, in the 
summer, to sleep under the open air, having the whole body, 
however, covered, to guard against injury from the cold of the 
night ; nay, they sometimes erect tents on the roof ; they go up 
to speak privately with some one, to have a view of the public 
solemnities, to lament in public, or to announce something to all 
the people. To all these things there are many allusions in the 
scripture. Hence, for security sake it was necessary to surround 
the roof with a parapet wall, which, on the sides facing the 
street and the court of the house, was as high as a man's breast, 
but on the sides next to the adjoining houses it was lower, so 
that, where the houses were contiguous and of the same height, 
it was easy to pass from one to the other. 

The door of the house was in the middle of the front wing ; 
and hence it is called by the Arabs the middle. It was kept ha- 
bitually closed ; and hence a male or female servant was always 
in attendance at it. (Acts, xii, 13; John, xviii, 16, 17.) The 



AND OF THE FTTRNTTURE, ETC. 



395 



door opened into a porch or vestibule, which was a kind of square 
room furnished with a low seat around the walls. This vestibule 
was used for the despatch of business, and the reception of ordi- 
nary visitors, who were not admitted farther into the house. 
From this vestibule, or from the entrance of the court, which 
was just beside it, rose the stairs, which conducted to the upper 
storeys and to the roof. From the vestibule a door opened into 
the court or area, which was enclosed by the four wings of the 
building, and which was called the middle. (2nd Kings, xvii, 18 : 
Luke, v, 10.) The pavement of this court was often composed 
of variegated marble ; and if the site of the place admitted of it, 
a fountain occupied its centre. Within the court, and along the 
four sides of the edifice, or at least along one of them, there was 
a portico, and around the upper story there was a balcony sup- 
ported by the pillars of the portico which ran beneath. (4th 
Kings, i, 2, 16, 18.) "When upon any remarkable occasion 
guests were numerous, they were received in this court ; and, 
therefore, there was always kept ready on the roof a coarse cloth, 
by which the whole area of the court could be covered, and the 
heat of the sun warded off. The remote wing of the building, 
opposite to the entrance, was the residence of the women, which 
on one side faced the garden. In the smaller houses, which 
consisted but of one wing, the place of the women was in the 
upper storey ; which agrees with several references to this matter 
in the Iliad and Odyssey of Homer. 

In the better sort of houses the apartments were lofty and 
ample. The doors of the apartments opened in the under storey 
into the portico or cloister ; in the upper into the balcony ; their 
ceilings were of wood, and panelled ; and the walls of the rooms 
were wainscotted, and sometimes covered with costly hangings. 
(Jerem., xxii, 14 ; Agg., i, 4.) The rich had summer houses 
and winter houses, mentioned by the prophet Amos, (iii, 15.) 
These have been supposed, however, by some to mean different 
apartments of the same house; the one exposed to a northern, 
and the other to a southern aspect. 

Ezechiel alone makes mention of the kitchen, (xlvi, 23, 24.) 
The fire appears to have been placed upon the pavement. 
Chimneys such as ours are a modern invention. The ancients, 
like the Easterns of the present day, permitted the smoke to 
escape by means of a hole in the wall or a window. 

The doors of the houses were secured by a crossbar or bolt. 
To open them from without, a key was used, which was large 
and commonly of wood. It was passed through a hole in the 
top of the door, and being of a crooked form it could be brought 
in contact with the bar, so as to remove it from its fastening 



396 



OF THE HABITATIONS OP THE HEBEEWS, 



place. Sometimes the hole for admitting the key was so large 
that one could put in his hand, and thus remove the bar without 
the help of a key. (See Canticles, v, 4.) It is said that some- 
times the doors were fastened with bands or chains to which a 
padlock was suspended. 

The windows looked into the court ; and in the women's 
apartment, into the garden. There were but one or two windows 
facing the street, and these were generally kept covered by cross- 
bars, being only opened at the approach of public solemnities. 
(Judg., v, 28; Prow, vii, 6; 4th Kings, ix, 30; Cant., ii. 9.) 
The windows were large and extended down almost to the pave- 
ment, that those who sat on the pavement might see through 
them ; for they were commonly open, and were without glass. 
They were, however, protected by bars ; and in winter they 
were closed with veils, of such a texture that one could see 
through them, or with shutters, in which a hole was made for 
the admission of the light. (3rd Kings, vii, 17, 18; Canticles, 
ii, 9.) We have referred already to the matter of which houses 
were formed. Ko doubt at first stones and clay were of most 
common use ; yet bricks were from remote antiquity, as they still 
are, much used in the East ; they were of two kinds : one was 
merely dried in the sun ; the other kind, which was intended 
for more durable buildings, was burned at the fire. As a cement 
there were used the substances already mentioned. In using 
lime for this purpose they mixed it with sand and made it into 
mortar. The custom of plastering the walls with cement was 
common even in the time of Moses. (Levit., xiv, 41, 42, 45 ; 
Deut, xxvii, 2.) 

Timber was used in buildings, not only for the gates and 
doors, the shutters and lattice work of the windows, and in the 
composition of the flat roof; but also for the ceiling, panelling, 
and wainscotting, with which the several apartments were orna- 
mented. The kinds of wood most commonly used were, the 
sycamore, which is exceedingly durable, the acacia, palmwood, 
fir, wild olive, and, what was much more precious than any of 
these, cedar. 

Fifth. — Of Villages and Cities. In progress of time, when 
men increased upon the earth, and found themselves less safe in 
their detached tents or huts, they began to live together, and to 
fortify their groups of dwellings by means of a ditch and simple 
breastwork. Such was the commencement of fortified cities. 
Such, we may suppose, was the city which Cain built. . In the 
course of time the deep moat with wall and towers, took the 
place of the ditch and simple breastwork. When Abraham 
came into the land of Chanaan there were many cities there. In 



AND OF THE EUKXITURE, ETC. 



397 



Egypt the Israelites found still more considerable cities-; and 
when they returned again to take possession of the land of 
Chanaan they found the cities exceedingly numerous, containing 
many inhabitants, and strongly fortified. (Xumb., xiii, 28.) 
As the Hebrews increased in the country their cities became 
still more numerous ; many of them were well fortified ; of which 
the principal ones were built upon an elevated site, and sur- 
rounded with a double, and sometimes even with a triple wall. The 
streets in the Asiatic cities are very narrow, not exceeding from 
two to four cubits in breadth, and they are made thus narrow in 
order to keep off the rays of the sun ; but it is evident that they 
must have been wider formerly, as they admitted carriages to 
pass through them, which are now scarcely ever to be seen in 
the East. The streets of towns and cities were commonly un- 
paved, and were thus in dry weather very dusty, and in wet 
very dirty. 

In the early times the markets were held at the gates of the 
cities — (where also justice was dispensed). The market, 
although sometimes without^the walls, was generally held within 
them. Here commodities were exposed to sale, either in the 
open air or in tents. (4th Kings, vii, 18 ; 2nd Paralip., xviii, 9 ; 
Job, xxix, 7.) But in the time of our Redeemer, as Josephus 
informs us, the markets were inclosed after the manner of the 
modern Eastern bazaars : that is, in the form of streets, closed 
above by an arched roof, in which holes were made to admit the 
light. On each side of this street the traders' shops are disposed 
in rows. This street or bazaar has gates, which are closed at 
night. 

The houses in Eastern cities are rarely contiguous, and have 
very frequently ample gardens annexed to them. When, there- 
fore, we read of ^inive and Babylon having occupied such a vast 
space of ground, we are not to imagine that all this was covered 
with houses in close junction with one another. Ancient writers 
testify that almost the third part of Babylon was occupied with 
gardens and fields. 

Menander, quoted by Josephus, testifies that aqueducts are 
of high antiquity in the cities of the East. It would appear 
that the principal cities of Palestine were provided with these. 
Indeed, the scripture does not leave us in doubt on the matter 
as far as Jerusalem was concerned. Like all the other ancient 
aqueducts, those of Asia were built overground, and conducted 
through the vallies by means of arches and pillars. 

Sixth. — Of the Furniture of the lielrew Dwellings. The 
furniture in the early times of the Hebrew commonwealth was 
very simple and scanty. A handmill for grinding their corn, 



398 



OP THE HABITATIONS OP THE HEBREWS, ETC. 



a kneading trough, and an oven for preparing their food, could 
not be dispensed with. (See Levit., xxvi, 26 ; Deut., xxiv, 6.) 
The construction] of the handmill is easily conceived ; it was 
composed of two stones, flat and circular, placed upon each other, 
and the upper one, such as could be turned round by the hand, 
a handle being attached to it for the purpose. The kneading 
trough was merely a wooden bowl, and not of large dimensions. 
The oven was sometimes only an earthen pot, in which fire was 
put to heat it, and on the outside of which the dough was spread 
and almost instantly baked. Besides these, there were pots and 
dishes of earthenware, and bottles made of skins. To these we 
must add some coarse carpeting, which being spread upon the pave- 
ment or floor formed the bed for the night. In the course of time, 
and in the houses of the rich, the furniture was costly and various 
— bowls, cups, and drinking vessels of gold and silver. (See 3rd 
Kings, x, 21.) The carpets were of the richest material; and 
along the side of the apartments there was often placed upon 
these carpets a range of narrow beds or mattresses, provided with 
several velvet or damask bolsters for the greater convenience of 
those who reclined upon them. (See Ezechiel, xiii, 18, 21.) 
And in the houses of the rich, the bed for night appears to have 
been placed in an elevated situation at one end of the chamber ; 
the supports of this bed were often of a rich material, ornamented 
with ivory. The coverlid was also splendid. As for the poor, 
their upper garment or cloak served them as a covering for the 
night. (See Exodus, xxii, 26, 27 ; Deut., xxiv, 12.) 

Besides the beds already mentioned, there were yet other 
couches or sofas which were placed around the table, and on 
which they sat, or rather reclined at meals. It appears from 
the scripture that the use of this sort of couches among the 
Hebrews does not go farther back than the time of Saul. (1st 
Kings, xxviii, 23.) In the houses of the poor the furniture of 
the rooms was exceedingly scanty, consisting only of a mattress 
and pillow, a table and a lamp. 

There is often mention made in scripture of lamps. They 
were fed with oil of olives. It appears that they were kept 
burning during the entire night. Besides these, the Hebrews 
otten used torches or flambeaux, which were sometimes formed 
of resinous wood, such as the olive tree, pine, fir — or they were 
made of twisted cord, covered with pitch, oil, wax, or some such 
matter. It appears that the houses of the rich were heated in 
the winter months by a charcoal fire, placed upon a moveable 
hearth, which could be transferred from one room to another, as 
is still the custom in those countries. The best fuel which the 
poor could get was the raw wood, 



PASTORAL LIFE OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS. 



399 



CHAPTEK II. 

OF THE NOMADIC OR PASTORAL LIFE OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS. 

The pastoral manner of life is most ancient and honourable ; 
such was that led by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the Israel- 
ites their descendants, until they got possession of the promised 
land. These shepherds had no fixed abode, they dwelt in tents ; 
their property consisted in their flocks. Many of them were 
very powerful, maintaining a great number of slaves and mer- 
cenaries, as we read of Abraham. 

The pastures in which these noble shepherds fed their flocks 
were large tracts of country devoid of houses, and unappropriated 
by individuals. These were called deserts. In these deserts or 
pastures the shepherds often changed their residence, going in 
summer towards the north or the mountainous districts — in the 
winter to the south or the plains. The tents were taken down 
in the space of a few hours, and being placed upon beasts of 
burthen, were carried to the spot where they were again to be 
erected. The flock remained under the open air night and day 
during the whole year. 

Water is very rare in those deserts ; at the same time, being 
so necessary for these immense flocks, it was valued most highly, 
and most frugally dispensed. (Job, xxii, 7 ; Numb., xx, 17, 19.) 
Hence those who lead that pastoral life of which we speak dig 
wells and cisterns in that part of the desert which they frequent ; 
and these they contrive to conceal in such a way, that no other 
person shall observe them, and steal the water from them. Con- 
tentions or suits at law about these wells were of great moment. 
(Gen., xxi, 25 ; xxvi, 15, 22.) The receptacles lor water in the 
desert were of various kinds. First, springs and fountains. If 
these poured out their waters on the surface of the ground, they 
were common to all. Such as did not pour out their waters 
above ground were wells, which were the property of those who 
first got possession of them or dug them. Sometimes these latter 
were common to several shepherds, who came at appointed times 
in the day to water their flocks in order. The water of foun- 
tains and wells was most highly valued — it was called living 
water. Second, cisterns, often mentioned in scripture, belonged 
to those who dug them. (Numb., xxi, 22.) By this name are 
called large subterraneous vaults, which sometimes covered an 
immense space of ground, having a narrow mouth, by which in 



400 



OF THE NOMADIC OR PASTORAL LIFE 



winter the rain and snow-water was received ; afterwards this 
mouth or aperture was closed with a large stone, and covered over 
with sand or earth, so that it could not be easily observed. In 
cities the cisterns were of a better sort, for they were surrounded 
with subterraneous well- plastered walls, or they were cut out 
of the rocks. If by chance the water of the shepherd, laid 
up in the cistern was lost, by an earthquake, or any other mis- 
fortune, or stolen, then both the shepherds and their flocks were 
in clanger of perishing ; which was also the case with travellers 
hastening to the fountain, if its water had failed ; wherefore the 
want of water is a symbol of exceeding great calamity, or even 
of destruction. (Isaias, xli, 17, 18; xliv, 3.) Empty cisterns 
have a great deal of mud at the bottom, so that he who is thrown 
into them dies a miserable death ; especially if the door or mouth 
of the cistern be closed, that even his cry may not be heard. 
(Gen., xxxvii, 22, and following ; Jereni., xxxviii, 6.) Never- 
theless empty cisterns were sometimes used as prisons. 

The flocks which these shepherds, of whom we speak, fed in 
great numbers, were sheep and goats. Among the present 
nomadic Arab tribes the condition of the sheep very much cor- 
responds with what it was in the time of these ancient Hebrew 
shepherds. Being a source of great emolument to the nomades 
they are highly valued by them. They give them titles of en- 
dearment, and the ram that is called out by his master marches 
before the flock ; hence the rulers of the people are so often in 
the scripture compared to these " leaders of the flock." (Jerem., 
xxv, 34, 35 ; 1. 8.) The Bedouins have certain names by which 
they call the sheep, either to drink or to be milked : the sheep 
know the voice of the shepherd, and go at his bidding. (John, x, 
3, 14.) The Arabs on the borders of Syria shear their sheep 
once a year, near the end of spring. Habitually by the settled 
inhabitants, and by the Bedouins when they possess the conve- 
nience, the sheep are, before the shearing, collected into an open 
enclosure surrounded by a wall. The object of this is, that the 
wool may be rendered finer by the sweating and evaporation. 
Among the ancient Hebrews sheep-shearings were great festivals, 
being to the sheep-master what the harvest was to the agricul- 
turist. Sometimes a lamb is taken into the tent and tended and 
brought up like a dog. (See 2nd Kings, xii, 13-19.) Goats are 
frequently mentioned in the scriptures as forming a very impor- 
tant portion of the flocks. The many useful qualities of the 
goat seem to have recommended it almost as early as the sheep 
to the care of the early pastoral tribes. ^Yhen proper attention 
is paid to this animal it is scarcely exceeded by the sheep in use- 
fulness to man. Its flesh is much esteemed in the East, and that 



OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS. 



401 



of the kids is most excellent. The hair is more valued than that 
of the camel. Among all the Bedouins this hair constitutes, the 
material of which the coverings of tents are made as well as pro- 
vision bags. The milk also is highly esteemed. Of the skins of 
the goat leather bottles are made. These are often mentioned in 
the bible. "When intended for water the hairy side of the skin 
is external, but in wine bottles the hairy side is internal. Of the 
skins of kids small bottles which answer the purpose of flasks are 
made. The treatment of goats in the flock is little distinguished 
from that of the sheep, and mixed flocks of sheep and goats live 
peaceably together. 

Oxen, except for agricultural labour, appear to be of much 
less importance in Syria now than they were in former times. 
Although chiefly employed in agriculture, oxen were not in olden 
times, as now, excluded from the possessions of the nomades. 
(Gen., xxvi, 25 ; Job, i, 3.) The oxen-herdsmen were deemed 
inferior to the keepers of sheep and goats, but they possessed the 
richest pastures in Basan and Saron. Hence, the oxen and bulls 
of Basan, which were not only well fed but strong and ferocious, 
are used as the symbols of ferocious enemies. (Isai., xxxiv, 7 ; 
Ezech., xxxvi, 18, &c.) The horns of oxen, bulls, and goats 
were used metaphorically to express power. (Amos, vi, 13 ; 
Jerem., xlviii, 15, &c.) If the horns are represented as made of 
brass or iron they indicate great power. (3rd Kings, xxii, 11, &c.) 
Hence, ancient coins represent kings with horns. Oxen were 
not only employed in drawing carts and ploughs, but, by the 
nomades, they were frequently made to carry burdens on the 
back like the camels. Cheeses were made of the milk of cows. 
Coagulated milk also was laid up in vessels, where it was 
permitted to grow hard, and afterwards cut into slices for use. 
Butter is much used by the nomades, as it was by the Hebrews 
UDtil they became settled in Palestine, when olive oil supplied 
many of its uses, Milk and honey were accounted dainties by 
the Hebrews. Hence, to show the excellence of the land of 
Chanaan, it is so often described in scripture as " a land flowing 
with milk and honey. " It is during winter that cow's milk is 
chiefly in use ; and it is not so much valued as that of goats, 
which is obtainable in Syria from the beginning of April to Sep- 
tember. 

Asses were much used by the nomades. The she-asses were 
the more valuable on account of their young ; hence, in the de- 
scription of the property of any one in scripture we often find 
the she-asses distinctly mentioned. In those ancient times the 
use of the horse was but rare, except for warlike purposes : the 
ass, then, was the beast of civil life, and hence, it was treated 

2 D 



402 



OP THE NOMADIC, OE PASTORAL LIFE 



with such care as to breed and rearing, that it had, and still has, 
in the East, a very different appearance and character from that 
which it bears with us. Climate, also, may have something to 
do with the difference, as it appears that the ass is, constitu- 
tionally, the animal of a warm climate. In the genial climates 
of western and central Asia, where the ass is carefully trained, 
and deemed no unworthy rival of the horse, the asses are not 
only diligent and patient, but active, beautiful in appearance, 
and in no wise ignoble. Anciently princes and great men rode 
on asses. The asses used in riding, among the Hebrews, were, 
as now, guided by a rein placed in the mouth. The saddle was 
merely a piece of cloth thrown over the back of the animal. 
Among the wealthy, especially when women rode, a slave fol- 
lowed with a staff, which he used occasionally in order to 
quicken the animal's speed. (Judg., xix, 3 ; 4th Kings, iv, 24.) 
Asses were employed for the plough and the cart, and, at a 
later period they were made to turn mills of the larger sort. 
(ILatt., xviii, 6.*) It was prohibited to the Hebrews to yoke 
together in the plough an ox and an ass. (Deuter., xxii, 10.) 

Mules are noticed in the reign of David. They are supposed 
to have been more ancient among the Hebrews, who did not 
themselves rear them, but procured them from strangers. At a 
more recent period the best mules came from Thogorma, or 
Armenia. (Ezeeh., xxvii, 14.) The great mules of Persia, 
celebrated for their swiftness, are mentioned in Esther, (viii, 
10.) 

The wild ass is frequently mentioDed in the scripture. It 
was well known from a very early period in Palestine and Edom. 
From the scriptural intimations regarding it, it appears that the 
wild ass was an animal of the desert and the mountain — per- 
haps changing from the one to the other with the season, and 
bounding as if in exultation at his freedom from the yoke man 
had imposed upon his kind. It was less an inmate of Palestine 
than of the bordering plains and mountains. The intense and 
untameable wildness of the animal is implied in nearly all the 
allusions to it. We also learn from the scripture that it was the 
prey of the lion in the wilderness. (Eccles., xiii, 9.) 

Camels are very frequently mentioned in the scriptures. 
The Easterns distinguish several kinds of them : these can be re- 
duced, however, to two — a knowledge of wmich will be sufficient 
for the understanding of the scripture, in its reference to this 
animal. One of these species has two humps on the body. 

* Our Rhemish version here has simply mill-stone. In the Greek it 
is nv\ug ovikoc mola asimria, as the Vulgate has it. 



OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS. 



403 



This sort is large, and very strong, but does not so well endure 
the heat. Camels of the other species, which have but one 
hump, are smaller, but they can travel at a very quick pace ; 
they have also extraordinary powers of endurance of heat, 
fatigue, and thirst. These are designated in Hebrew by the 
name oikirkaroth, (n"0~0,)in Greek by that of Aoo/iccdss, drome- 
daries. When a journey is to be made in Arabia or in Persia, 
the camel is sometimes furnished with a kind of saddle, which 
has nothing in common with ours ; it is, in reality, a little house, 
in which one can easily place what is necessary for the journey. 
This saddle is called by the Arabians, hour ; and the Hebrews 
designated the samething, no doubt, by the name "12, ijcar). (See 
Gen., xxxi, 34, in the Hebrew.) The camel supports itself with 
little food ; and it can bear thirst, even during fatiguing 
journeys, for eight or ten days consecutively ; a thing which 
renders it of great value, inasmuch as, in the vast deserts which 
it is used for traversing, water is but rarely to be met with. In 
a word, the camels are of exceeding utility ; they serve for riding, 
and they will carry all kinds of burthens. The nomades de- 
rive yet other advantages from them : they drink their milk — 
they, sometimes, eat their flesh, a thing, however, which was 
forbidden to the Hebrews. (Lev., xi, 4.) Of their hair, which 
falls every year, a kind of coarse cloth is made, which serves the 
common people for clothing, (comp. Matt., iii, 4.) It is, no 
doubt, in consideration of all these services which they derive 
from them, that the nomades have been at all times extremely 
solicitous to multiply the number of these animals. 

The Horse is much valued by the nomades of recent ages — 
much more so than by those of an earlier period. The indica- 
tions of the presence of the horse among the Bedouins are of a 
late date ; but we find them early and constantly among the 
Egyptians. (Gen., xlvii, 17 ; xlix, 17 ; Exod., ix, 3, &c.) That 
country was always celebrated for those animals. (3rd Kings, x, 
28 ; Isai., xxxi, 1 ; xxxvi, 9.) Josue encountered chariots and 
horses in the north of Palestine ; but w r as directed to render the 
horses he captured useless, by cutting their hamstrings; for, 
while they could be of little comparative advantage in the moun- 
tains of Palestine, the pride and confidence connected with the 
early use of the horse was uncongenial to the first principles of 
the theocratic institution. (Jos., xi, 4-9; comp. Judg., iv, 15; 
v, 22-28.) A short time afterwards we flud the Philistines 
bringing chariots to the battle. (Judg., i, 10 ; 1st Kings, xiii, 5.) 
Anciently, horses were exclusively used for the purposes of war. 
(Pro v., xxi. 31.) Hence they are opposed to asses, which were 
used in times or peaee. (Zach., ix, 9.) Trie Hebrews first pail 



-:0i OF THE NOMADIC, OK PASTORAL LIFE, ETC. 

attention to the breeding of horses in the time of Solomon. The 
hundred which were reserved (according to what we read in 2nd 
Kings, viii, 4 ; 1st ParaL, xviii, 4,) were destined for the use of 
David himself, whose example was imitated by Absalom. (2nd 
Kings, xv, 1.) We find frequent allusions in the Psalms to the 
mode of governing horses, and to equestrian armies. Solomon 
carried on a great trade in Egyptian horses. (3rd Kings, x, 28 ; 
2nd ParaL, i, 16, 17.) A horse was estimated at about one 
hundred and fifty, and a chariot at six hundred sides. In the 
time of Ezechiel the Tyrians purchased horses in Thogorma, or 
Armenia. (Ezech., xxvii, 14.) The Hebrews after the time of 
Solomon were never destitute of chariots and cavalry. The 
rider used neither stirrup nor saddle, but sat upon a piece of 
cloth thrown over the back of the horse. Horses were not shod 
with iron before the ninth century of our era ; hence solid hoofs 
were esteemed of great consequence. (Amos, vi, 12 ; Isai., v. 
28.) The bridle and the curb were used for horses and mules. 
(Psalm xxxi, 9.) 

The Dog is of great service to the nomades, not only in 
guarding the flocks, but also in keeping watch about the tents 
during the night. Notwithstanding its services, the dog has 
been always reputed a vile and unclean animal. The epithet of 
dog, addressed to any one, is a contumelious expression, convey- 
ing great contempt for the person thus addressed. About the 
time of our Eecleemer, the Jews were in the habit of giving this 
name to the pagans. In the cities of the East it is only the 
hunters who keep dogs in their houses ; there, these animals 
commonly have no masters, they roam in the streets and public 
places in search of food ; and often, as they do not find what is 
sufficient for them, they will devour dead bodies, which they 
may find exposed, or even attack living men. (3rd Kings, xiv, 
11 ; xvi, 14, &c. ; Jerem., xv, 3.) Having now noticed all the 
animals of which an account of the ancient nomadic life makes 
it necessary to treat, we shall stop here, as we do not intend to 
speak of all the animals mentioned in the scripture. The great 
work on the zoology of the scripture, is Bochart's Hierozoicon, 
of which Rosenmuller's edition is most sought after — (Samuelis 
Pocharti Hierozoicon, site de Animalilvs S. Scripturce : recensuit 
suis not is adjectis — E. E. C. Eosenmuller. Lips., 1793, 3 tomis, 
4to.) 

Hunting, we may suppose, was a necessary occupation with 
the early nomades, in order to protect their flocks against beasts 
of prey. The scripture is full of allusions to hunting, and to the 
stratagems used by the hunter and fowler. The arms of the 
hunter were the same as those used in war. The stratagems to 



OF AGRICULTURE AiXIOXG THE HEBREWS. 



405 



which he had recourse were various : the net, the snare, the pit 
artfully concealed by a slight covering. These machinations 
are often used figuratively to signify great danger, or imminent 
destruction. 



CHAPTER III. 

OY AGRICULTURE AMONG THE HEBREWS. 

First. — Judea was eminently an agricultural country ; and the 
Mosaic statutes were admirably calculated to encourage agricul- 
ture as the chief foundation of national prosperity. After they 
had acquired possession of the promised land, the Jews applied 
themselves strenuously to the cultivation of their lands, and the 
tending of cattle ; and we find that among them great and 
wealthy men did not disdain to follow husbandry. 

Second. — Laws of Moses respecting Agriculture. Moses gave to 
the Hebrews agriculture, as the basis of the state. He assigned 
to each citizen a certain quantity of land, which he was to cul- 
tivate and leave to his heirs. This land the owner could not 
alienate in perpetuity. The term of alienation was limited by 
the next year of jubilee, when the original proprietor re-entered 
upon possession. By this wise disposition of the law, the rich 
were hindered from becoming almost the sole proprietors of the 
land — a thing which has generally happened in the other coun- 
tries of the East. To this first law Moses added a second, i.e., 
that in the interval between the sale and the year of jubilee, the 
vendor, or his nearest relative, would have the right to redeem 
his property, by paying to the actual holder of it all the profits 
which would accrue to him from the land up to the year of 
jubilee. Moses, in fine, wishing that the possessions of the 
Hebrews might be regarded as a sacred thing, ordained that 
their limits or boundaries should be marked by stones, and he 
pronounced anathema against the person who would presume to 
change these landmarks. In conformity with these laws Josue 
divided the whole country ; first, among the several tribes, and 
secondly, among individual Israelites, making the partition by 
means of a measuring-line ; from which circumstance the line is, 
in several parts of the scripture, used by a figure of speech, for 
the land or heritage itself. 

Third. — Means which the Hebrews employed to augment the 
fertility of their land. The Hebrews had an opportunity during 



406 



OE AGRICULTURE A^tfOXO THE HEBREWS. 



their residence in Egypt, of witnessing the zeal with which agri- 
culture was there carried on. They could at the sametirae 
learn its operations, which at that period of the world, were 
everywhere very simple. However, although the practices of 
Egyptian husbandry were the same in essential forms with 
those afterwards adopted by the Hebrews in Palestine, it is yet 
manifest that the processes, which were proper to a hot climate, 
and alluvial soil watered by river inundation, like that of 
Egypt, could not, without some modification, have been appli- 
cable to so different a country as Palestine. The soil of Palestine 
is naturally of great fertility, particularly if the dew falls regu- 
larly, as is usually the case, and if the autumnal and vernal 
rains come in their season. Yet the Hebrews knew how to 
assist the natural fertility of the land. Sot only did they rid 
it of stones, (Osee, xii, 11;) but also by means of canals they 
conducted the water of the rivers through their fields, so that 
even in summer they could till them like gardens. (Prov., xxi, 
1 ; Isai., xxx, 25.) Wherefore, springs, fountains, and rivers 
were as much prized by the husbandmen as by the shepherds. 
(Jos., xv, 9 ; Judg., 1, 15.) Also, by burning the stubble and 
brambles with which the fields were covered during the sab- 
batical year, a fertilizing manure was procured at the sametime 
that the seeds of noxious weeds were destroyed. (Isai., vii, 23 ; 
xxii, 13. Prov., xxiv, 32.) Einally, the use of dung as a 
manure was well known to the Hebrews, (See among other 
places, Isai., xxv, 20 ; Jer., viii, 2 ; ix, 22 ; xvi, 4. Luke, xiv, 
34, 35.) 

Fourth. — Mode of Ploughing, Sowing, and Reaping practised 
ly the ITehrews. In the commencement of the world the instru- 
ments of agriculture must have been of the simplest kind. 
Perhaps nothing beyond sharp poles or sticks for loosening the 
soil was then in use. In the course of time the spade was intro- 
duced and then the plough ; both of these instruments were well 
known in the time of Moses. (Deut., xxiii, 10 ; Gen., xlv, 6 ; 
Job, i, 14.) The plough, simple in its construction, was yet 
furnished with a coulter and share. (See 1st Kings, xiii, 20, 21 ; 
Mich., iv, 3.) The ploughman was obliged to hold firmly the 
handle and to keep his eyes constantly fixed on the plough, lest 
any part of the field should remain untouched. (Luke, ix, 62.) 
The ancient Egyptian ploughs had a double handle like our own. 
It is most likely that the Hebrew plough was on this plan, 
although in Syria and Asia Minor a lighter kind of plough with 
but a single handle was used. The ploughs were drawn by two 
oxen. They carried a simple wooden yoke which was connected 
with the animals and the beam by means of ropes. Asses were 



OP AGRICULTURE A^fOXG- THE HEBREWS. 



407 



also used for ploughing, "but it was forbidden by the law to yoke 
together in the plough an ox and an ass. In ploughing they 
used goads, which were long poles — at present, in the East, they 
are as long as eight feet — were armed at one end with an iron 
point or prickle, by means of which the oxen were driven on ; at 
the other end they were provided with a small spade or paddle, 
also of iron, for cleansing the plough from the clay that incum- 
bered it in working. It is manifest that this goad would answer 
the purpose of a formidable warlike instrument. (See Judges, iii, 
31.) There can be no doubt but the Israelites used a harrow, or 
some instrument of the kind, for the purpose of breaking the clods, 
and thus preparing the ground for the seed. Yery probably it 
was at the time of harrowing that the seed was committed to the 
ground ; it appears, however, that often, as is still the custom 
in the East, the sower followed the plough, and cast the seed 
into the furrow which it made, so that the plough on its return 
might cover this seed whilst it opened a new furrow. 

In the very ancient times the ears of the corn were pulled off, 
or the stalks were plucked up by the roots, which is still prac- 
tised in some countries of the East. The Hebrews used a sickle, 
(Deut., xvi, 9 ; Jerera., 1, 16,) that the stubble might remain on 
the ground. As the crops were cut down they were gathered into 
sheaves. The sheaves were collected together into a heap or con- 
veyed away upon waggons. But some portion of the crop in the 
corner of the field as well as the gleaning of the whole field was 
to be left to the poor. (Levit., xix, 9; Deut., xxiv, 19; Ruth, 
ii, 2, 22.) 

Fifth. — Modes of Threshing out Com. The sheaves were 
carried either by the hands of men, or on beasts, or even on 
waggons, to the threshing-floor, where they were collected into 
a heap or stack. A sheaf which had been left behind, having 
been overlooked at the first clearing of the field, was not to be 
sought for again, but was to go to the poor with the other glean- 
ings. (Deut., xxiv, 19.) The threshing-floor was in the field — 
in some slightly elevated part of it : it was neither surrounded 
by a wall nor covered by a roof, but was merely a circular space 
of from thirty to forty paces in diameter, in which the ground 
was well levelled and beaten into a hard state. The modes of 
threshing were various : the most ancient, and one that always 
prevailed to a great extent was that in which sticks or flails were 
used for the purpose. Again, the corn was often threshed out 
by the hoofs of oxen : this mode is referred to iu the prohibition 
of Moses against muzzling the ox that treacleth out the corn, (Deut., 
xxv, 4,) and it obtains in Persia and India to this day. Einally, 
for this purpose certain machines were used, which were drawn 



408 



OF A GKRICUL T TJEE AMOXG THE HEBREWS. 



by oxen over the loose sheaves, and by means of which the grain 
was separated, and, at the same time the straw was cut and 
broken. 

The sheaves being now threshed, the whole of the broken 
straw as well as the detached grain and chaff, was heaped toge- 
ther in the midst of the floor, where it was agitated by a wooden 
fork in order to expose it to the action of the wind, (Jer., iv, 11, 
12,) which carried off the straw and chaff, and allowed the grain 
and clods of earth to which grains adhered and the ears which 
were not threshed out to fall on the floor. These clods of earth, 
as is still the custom in Asia, being collected together, were 
bruised and separated from the grains by the means of a sieve. 
The heap, which having been thus exposed to the wind had 
fallen upon the floor, and which contained many broken ears 
which had not been fully threshed out, was again subjected to 
the hoofs of the oxen. Finally, the corn was again, by means of 
a winnowing shovel, exposed to the wind ; which carried off the 
chaff, leaving the pure grain on the floor. This operation is 
used in scripture as a symbol of the separation between the 
good and the bad. (Matt., iii, 12.) As much of the straw as was 
necessary for making bricks, or for fodder for beasts was gathered 
up ; the rest, together with the chaff and stubble, was reduced to 
ashes by burning — to this custom there are many allusions in the 
scripture. (See Mala., iii, 17 ; Matt., iii, 12.) The corn was kept 
in subterraneous vaults or granaries ; but in course of time, not 
only in Egypt, but also in Palestine, granaries were built over 
ground. It would appear that oxen were chiefly used for all 
agricultural purposes by the Jews. As has been observed before 
they were prohibited in the law to plough with an ox and an ass 
together. (Deut., xxii, 10.) The reason of the law was, that it 
would be treating the ass with a degree of cruelty to join him in 
the yoke with an animal so much his superior in strength, 

The kinds of grain sown by the Jews were those mentioned 
by Isaias (xxviii, 25) ; the first is rendered in the Yulgate and 
Douay, gith, then are mentioned cumin, wheat, barley, and 
millet. Wheat was the most common kind of grain, as it still 
is in Syria and in Egypt. Palestine was fertile in wheat as well 
as in other produce. Earley was also a very common kind of 
grain in Palestine, as appears by several references to it in the 
scripture. Earley was very commonly used as an article of 
human food, although inferior to wheat. Solomon's horses were 
fed on barley, (3rd Kings, iv, 28,) and even yet barley is the 
common food for horses everywhere in the East. Millet is a 
kind of corn, still much cultivated in the East, and used as food 
by the inhabitants. The cumin is properly a garden plant, very 



OF AGRICULTURE AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



409 



common in every part of Europe, and its seeds have, even from 
the earliest ages, on account of their aromatic flavour, been used 
by many nations as seasoning for bread and other victuals. 
With the Hebrews the cumin was cultivated in ploughed fields, 
with the same care as barley and wheat. In our Bedeemer's 
time the Pharisees paid tithes from the cumin, (Matt., xxiii, 23,) 
although they were not bound to do so by the law of Moses. 
The gith or git was also a garden plant, but cultivated by the 
Hebrews in ploughed fields like the cumin. The Hebrew name 
is understood to designate fitches. The name which the Ger- 
mans give to the plant, signifies black cumin. The prophet 
Isaias, in the same place here referred to, (verse 27,) mentions 
the several modes of threshing at the time, saying, " for gith shall 
not be threshed with saivs" (which shows that such instruments 
were dragged over the corn in sheaves, for the double purpose of 
detaching the grain, and breaking the straw,) " neither shall the 
cartwheel turn about upon cumin" (" It is a question if this is 
a different kind of machine, as the reference might be to the 
saws just mentioned, which would thus be nothing else than the 
serrated cart-wheels ;) " but gith shall be beaten out ivith a rod, 
and cumin with a staff." Leguminous vegetables were also cul- 
tivated in Palestine. Thus, in the scripture we find the follow- 
ing, designated by their Hebrew names : beans, lentils, wild 
lettuces, (merorim D^~Hft the herbs which were to be eaten with 
the paschal lamb,) cucumbers, melons, onions, garlic, leeks, and 
according to some, the wild cucumber. 

Sixth. — Of Vineyards, and the Culture of the Vine and 
Olive. The Hebrews at all times cultivated the vine with the 
greatest care ; and the soil of Palestine, otherwise remarkable 
for its fertility, produced in abundance excellent grapes ; but 
there were some parts of the country more particularly renowned 
for their vines : these were, especially, the country of Engaddi, 
and the valley of Eschol, and of Sorec. These two valleys, 
indeed, had their names from the excellent vines with which 
they were covered, for eschol (b^iPS) signifies a cluster of 
grapes, and sorck (p"WJ an extending branch, alluding to the 
vine. Modern travellers confirm all that the scripture says of 
these vines, and their fruit. These travellers testify to the 
immense weight of the clusters of grapes produced by these 
vines. One observes : " I have seen every year in several 
places, and at different times, clusters which weighed seven and 
eight pounds — I have seen some even weighing twelve pounds. 
In the year 1634 there was found in the valley of Sorec one 
which weighed twenty-five pounds and a-half." — P. Eoger, La 
Terre Sainte, liv. 1, ch. 2. 



410 



OF A GRICTLTT7RE A^TONG THE HEBREWS. 



For the most part the grapes of Palestine are red or black in 
the colour ; hence, without cloubt, conies the Hebrew expression, 
which has passed into many other languages, the Hood of the 
grape, signifying the juice of this fruit. Alany vines, by means 
of props, or some kind of support, had their stems and branches 
so elevated that one could easily enjoy the shade under them ; 
hence, the figurative expression, so often to be met with in 
scripture, "to be seated under one's own vine, and one's own fg 
tree" which means, to enjoy a happy and tranquil life. The 
vineyards were, ordinarily, surrounded with a hedge or fence. 
Towers also were built in them, (Isai., v. 2; Matt., xxi, 23.) 
in which watchmen were placed to see and to ward off thieves, 
as also certain wild beasts, which, if the place were left un- 
guarded, would destroy the vines. However, according to law, 
(Deut., xxiii, 25.) the passing traveller was not to be prohibited 
from pulling a few grapes, which he might take in his hand and 
eat by the way. The Hebrews were also careful in pruning 
their vines, in removing the weeds from about them, and in 
gathering the stones off the vineyards. 

The time of the vintage was, among the Hebrews, like the 
time of the corn harvest, a season of pleasure and rejoicings : 
it was in the midst of joyous shouts and canticles that the grapes 
were gathered, and borne to the winepress, which was in the 
middle of the vineyard. At the same time, to gather the grapes 
and to tread them in the winepress, are, in the language of the 
prophets, symbolical of great combats — of frightful calamities. 
(Isa., xvii, 6 ; Ixiii, 1-3; Jer., xlix, 9; Lamen., i, 15.) 

The new wine, as is still usual in the East, was kept in 
large jars of stone or earthenware, answering to the amphorm of 
the ancient Eomans. These jars were buried in the earth. 
Wine-cellars were not subterraneous, but built over ground : the 
jars which were laid up in the cellar were either buried in the 
floor, or placed lying upon it. Anciently, however, the new 
wine was also preserved in skins, which should be new, as other- 
wise the fermenting wine would burst them. (Job, xxxii, 19 ; 
Matt., ix, 17; Mark, ii, 22.) A part of the grapes also was 
dried in the sun, and formed into cakes or masses, which we 
find mentioned several times in the scripture. (1st Kings, vi, 
19 ; 2nd Kings, xvi, 1 ; 1 Paral., xii, 14 ; Osee, iii, 1.) 

The olive tree is a very ancient and profitable object of hus- 
bandry : its branch has been used by all nations as an emblem 
of peace and prosperity — an usage which is traced to what is 
mentioned in Grenesis. (viii, 12.) We find mention made of oil 
in Genesis (xxviii, 18); and in Job (xxiv, 11); which shows 
that the culture of the tree was very ancient. In Palestine the 



OF AGEICT7LTTJRE A^JOXG- THE HEBREWS. 



411 



olive trees are of the best kind, and produce oil of the first 
quality ; hence "the country is praised for its olive trees, particu- 
larly as contrasted with Egypt, where these trees were of an in- 
ferior quality. (Xumb. xviii, 13 ; Deut., vii, 13 ; xi, 14 ; xii, 17 ; 
xviii, 51.) The best soil for these trees is that which is sandy, 
dry, and mountainous. Prom its olive trees Mount Olivet, ne-ir 
Jerusalem, had its name. The tree is very agreeable to the 
sight, as it remains green throughout the winter: its multiplied 
branches have caused it to be taken as the symbol of a numerous 
progeny. (Osee., xiv, 7; Jer., xi, 16, 17.) The tree will last for 
two hundred years ; and even at the end of that period, the new 
stems, which have grown from the ancient root, will have taken 
the place of the decayed tree. No other culture is necessary 
but to dig the earth about the tree, and to prune the branches 
or leaves. Some of the fruit was eaten as it came from the tree ; 
but almost the entire of it was brought to the press, that the oil 
might be procured from it ; one thousand pounds weight of which 
has been sometimes obtained from one tree. Hence the Hebrews 
sold large quantities of oil to the Tynans, (Ezech., xxvii, 17) ; 
and sent presents of it to the kings of Egypt. (Osee., xii, 2.) The 
oil-presses were worked with the feet (Mich., vi, 15) ; and the 
first stream of oil was more generous than the second ; and the 
second more generous than the third. The oil-press was called 
in Hebrew Gatli Shemen (]E27ro,) whence comes the name of 
the garden Gethsemani. (Matt., xxvi, 36; John, xviii, 1.) The 
best of the oil, being mixed with aromatic perfumes, was used 
for the unctions of the body ; the rest was used with all kinds of 
food; wherefore, even in the sacrifices, which were as if the 
banquets of the Great King, the use of oil was commanded : (Lev. 
ii, 1-7 ; xv, 6-8, 9,) — oil was, moreover, used in the lamps. 

The olive is also found in a wild state, growing without cul- 
ture. This tree is called in Greek ay^zXaioz , in Latin, oleaster. 
St. Paul takes an illustration from it in his Epistle to the 
Eomans. (xi, 17, 24.) 

Seventh. — Of Gardens. Esculent herbs and fruit trees were 
the first objects of agriculture ; hence gardens are very ancient, 
and have been common at all times. Ey the Hebrews they were 
carefully cultivated. The Hebrews of a later period were the 
more excited to the cultivation of gardens by the example of the 
Syrians, whom Pliny highly extols for their skill in gardening. 
Trees were multiplied by the seed, and by shoots : afterwards 
they were transplanted, the earth was dug about them and 
manured, and they were pruned. (Job, viii, 16 ; Isai., xvii, 10.) 
Ingrafting is referred to figuratively in Eomans. (xi, 17, 24.) 
The garden was never without a fountain or river — or some 



412 



OF AGRICULTURE AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



reservoir of water. (Dan., xiii, 4 ; Eccles., xxi, 40, 41.) In the 
bible the gardens are denominated from the kind of tree which 
prevailed in them, as the garden of nuts ; of pomegranates ; also 
the wood of palms, which was a large garden in the plain of 
Jericho. The Easterns of the present day are not less delightea 
with gardens than were the ancient Hebrews, not only because 
they produce the best description of fruit, but also because thev 
afford a most grateful shade, whilst the air is kept agreeably 
cool by the water with which the garden must be always sup- 
plied. (3rd Kings, xxii, 2 ; 4th Kings, xxv, 4; Osee., ix, 13 ; 
Cant., iv, 13; vi, 1 ; Eccl., ii, 5.) The Hebrews even loved to 
make the gardens their places of rest after death, and hence there 
they prepared their sepulchres, as appears from several passages 
of the scripture. (4th Kings, ix, 27; xxi, 18, 26; Mark, xv, 
46; Matt., xxvi, 39; John, xviii, 1, 2.) Erom the fondness 
for gardens alsQ, came the custom of designating a delightful 
country by the name of the garden of God, that is a most delight- 
ful place. Some of the garden trees, which are more frequently 
mentioned in the bible, and not so well known amongst us, we 
shall here briefly notice. Of the olive tree we have- spoken 
already. 

Fig trees were not less common in Palestine — they also, as 
well as the olive, delight in a dry and sandy soil. The tre e 
grows to a considerable size in Palestine, not altogether straight, 
yet high and leafy, so as to form an agreeable shade well known 
to the Hebrews. (Mich., iv, 4 ; Osee, ii, vi.) The fig tree shoots 
forth its fruit like so many buttons, before that either leaves or 
flowers make their appearance : and hence, with regard to the 
fig tree upon which our Redeemer laid his anathema, (Mark, xi, 
12-14,) the circumstance of its being in leaf at the time men- 
tioned in the Gospel rendered it reasonable to expect to find 
fruit on it ; and this it must have had if it had not been barren. 
The Hebrews used the figs partly in their fresh state, and part of 
them they dried in the sun and formed into cakes or masses. 

The tree called by naturalists the sycamore fig tree is well 
known in Palestine. It is a large tree with its leaves like those 
of the mulberry, and with a fruit much resembling the fig : and 
hence the compound name which has been given to it, Suxopopog 
from 6v/.zr), fig-tree, and/^o£>sa, the mulberry tree : others derive the 
name from cuztyi, and /uuoa, quasi ficus fatua : the foolish, or wild fig- 
tree. The trunk of the tree grows very thick : it bears many 
branches which stretch out almost horizontally, and hence, 
although the tree grows to a great height, it is easy to ascend its 
branches. (Luke, xix, 4, 5.) It keeps always green, and its 
wood, which is of a blackish colour, will last a thousand years : 



OF AGRICULTURE A3IONG THE HE3BEWS. 



413 



and hence it was much used in buildings. (1st Paralp, xxvii, 
28 ; Isa., ix, 9.) The fruit does not grow from the branches, or 
among the leaves, but shoots forth from the trunk : although 
like the fig in appearance, its quality is inferior, wherefore it is 
only among the poor that it forms an article of food. This fruit 
does not ripen unless pierced or scarified by some instrument : 
under this process it emits a juice like milk, and as the wound 
grows black the fruit ripens. (Amos, vii, 14.) The tree is ex- 
ceedingly fertile, bearing fruit no less than seven times a year. 

The pomegranate tree is much esteemed in Palestine : from 
the care with which it was cultivated among the ancient He- 
brews, it may have attained to a greater size than it is found to 
have at present. Still, however, in that country, Palestine, the 
tree is very thick and bushy, and of a considerable height : for it 
rises with a stem upwards of twenty feet high, sending out 
branches along the whole length ; which branches likewise put out 
many slender twigs. The fruit is about the size of an orange. Its 
richly-flavoured juice is most refreshing and pleasant to the 
Easterns. (See Numb., xiii, 24 ; xx, 5 ; Deut., viii, 8.) Among 
artificial ornaments the form of the pomegranate fruit held a 
high place. (Exod., xxviii, 34 ; 3rd Kings, vii, 18.) 

The Balsam or Balm is described both by ancient and modern 
writers, sometimes as a tree and sometimes as a shrub. Erom 
these accounts it appears, that the odoriferous juice called balsam 
is not obtained only from one plant. And, indeed, Pliny, (Hist. 
Nat. lib., lxii, cap. 25, § 54,) distinguishes three species of balsam 
plants, which differ as to height, strength, bark, and foliage. 
However, in describing the balsam plant we shall not attend to 
this distinction. We shall merely observe, that the balsam plant 
or tree grows at present near a village called Bederhunin in 
Arabia, situated between Mecca and Medina. The tract of 
country in which the tree here grows is small, about a mile in 
length — the soil is of a sandy, rocky description. The tree is 
described by Bruce, who saw it, as of the middle size, with 
spreading branches, and a smooth ash-coloured bark which is 
rough in the older parts. The balsam or balm, that is, the juice 
of this tree, is most highly prized both for its odoriferous and 
medicinal qualities. 

To procure the balm, or the juice of the tree, gashes are made 
in the branches, under which vessels are set to receive it. An 
inferior sort is made by boiling the young twigs and leaves over 
a gentle fire. The balsamic matter rises to the surface and is 
skimmed off. 

It is well known that these trees were formly cultivated in 
Palestine — anciently in Galaad, and afterwards in the vicinity 



414 



OF AGRICULTURE AMO^G THE HEBREWS. 



of Jericho and of Engaddi. This the scripture testifies in many 
places, as well as Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus, &c. In fact, this 
balsam or balm tree was, perhaps, the most renowned and pe- 
culiar of all the vegetable productions of Palestine. Pliny, {Hist. 
Nat., xii, 25,) states, that during Alexander's wars in Palestine 
the balm of the country sold at the rate of twice its weight in 
silver. The reputation of the balsam trees of Palestine had been 
so great among the Eomans, that among other things, young 
balsam trees were carried to Home to adorn the triumph of Ves- 
pasian and Titus for their victories over the Jews. The balm 
tree is no longer found in Judea. 

' Among the trees of Palestine the palm held a distinguished 
place ; it was carefully cultivated by the ancient Hebrews on 
account of its singular utility, affording, as it does, a grateful 
shade, an agreeable fruit, and a delicious wine. The finest palm 
trees were to be found in the vicinity of the Jordan and Engaddi ; 
and they are still to be seen in the plain of Jericho, which city 
was anciently termed by way of distinction, the city of palm trees. 
The palm tree was the common symbol of Palestine, many coins 
of Yespasian and other emperors being extant in which J udea is 
personified by a disconsolate woman sitting under a palm tree. 
The stem or trunk of the palm tree is straight and very tall : it 
is only on the top that it bears a crown of evergreen boughs. 
The dates, as the fruit of the palm tree is called, were partly 
eaten fresh, and partly thrown into the press, by means of which 
the date wine was extracted, and the pressed dates were formed 
into masses and preserved. Palm branches were carried in their 
hands by the Hebrews at the feast of Tabernacles, (Lev., xxiii, 
40 ;) and when kings solemnly entered a city they were strewn 
on his way. (1st Mach., xiii, 51 ; Matt., xxi, 18.) Among the 
Greeks the victors in the athletic games were presented with a 
palm bough, (comp. Apoc, vii, 6 ;) and hence the palm became 
an acknowledged symbol of victory. 

The terebinth or turpentine tree was also cultivated by the 
Hebrews. It is an evergreen of moderate size, but having the 
top and branches large in proportion to the trunk ; the leaves 
resemble those of the olive ; the fruit is of the size of the j uniper 
berries, hanging in clusters, and each containing a single seed of 
the size of a grape- stone ; they are of a ruddy purple, and re- 
markably juicy. Prom the trunk distils a valuable resin or gum, 
from which the tree takes its name. The pistachio-tree is of the 
same genus with the terebinth — its fruit, (says Jahn,) is men- 
tioned in Genesis, (xliii, 11,) by the name of JBotnim (D\Dt32) 
The fruit of the pistachio-tree is a species of nut of the finest 
quality, -somewhat like an almond, but much better tasted, and 



STATE OF THE AETS AHOXG THE HEBREWS. 



415 



therefore highly esteemed by the Easterns. Besides trie dif- 
ferent kinds of fruit already mentioned, the Hebrew gardens 
reared also almonds, apples, apricots, mulberries, &c. : but as 
we only proposed to ourselves to notice those trees which are 
more frequently mentioned in scripture, and less common with 
us, we shall now take leave to pass to another subject. 



CHAPTEE IV. 

STATE OF THE AETS AMONG THE HEBREWS. 

The invention of the arts was, doubtless, for the most part, the 
offspring of necessity — of the various wants of man : we say for 
the most part, because we have before our mind one art, which 
it is very hard to attribute to the invention of unassisted man — 
that is, the art of expressing by means of alphabetical characters 
the ideas of the mind. 

Considering whence the arts took their origin, it is not as- 
tonishing that they should date from the earliest age of the 
world. The longevity of the first men contributed much to the 
perfecting of the aits, as it afforded an opportunity of multi- 
plying exceedingly the lessons of experience. The forming of 
cities had also a favourable effect upon the arts : for here men 
could readily find assistance in their labours ; and the combined 
result of the experience of several soon manifested itself in the 
polishing and perfecting of the early arts, as well as in the in- 
vention of others. It is easy to judge by many passages of 
scripture, that even before the deluge there were many arts 
known and cultivated. Thus, as Moses testifies, Cain built a 
city ; Tubal-cain knew the art of working in metals, particularly 
in iron; and Jubal, his brother, invented instruments of music. 
(Gen., iv, 17, 21, 23.) But what is rnoie than sufficient to con- 
vince one of the great number of arts known before the deluge, 
is the history of the building and titling up of the ark of JSoe. 

JNoe and his sons, therefore, who had been engaged in the 
building of the ark, must have preserved for their posterity the 
knowledge of many arts. They had also seen before the deluge 
several other works of art, which, when that calamity had passed 
over, they no doubt contrived to imitate ; and hence, in the 
history which Genesis gives of the time that followed the deluge, 
we find mention made of several arts, as well as of various 
utensils, for the making of which an acquaintance with art was 
necessaiy. 



416 



OF THE ARTS AMOXO THE HEBREWS. 



The Hebrews learned many things in Egypt, which in the 
early times was renowned for its knowledge of the arts. In the 
desert the Israelites displayed a great acquaintance with the arts, 
in the preparation of the various requisites for the construction of 
the Tabernacle. The laws of Moses did not purpose to give an 
impulse to the arts ; at the sametime they did not interdict or 
discourage them, but as was usual at that time among other 
nations, left this matter to the industry of the people. 

A short time after the death of Josue, the valley of artificers 
was established by Joab of the tribe of Juda, (1st Paral., iv, 14,) 
and at that time there were workmen in gold and in silver. 
(Judg., xvii, 3, 5.) It is not recorded that the arts were making 
great progress at that time, although things of necessity were 
never wanting, unless when the artisans were carried off by the 
enemy. (Judg., iii, 31 ; v, 8 ; 1st Kings, xiii, 19.) The neces- 
sary instruments of husbandry, which were of easy workmanship, 
every one made for himself. Women also, and even matrons of 
rank were employed in spinning, weaving, and embroidering ; 
and they not only made garments for their own family, but also 
as an article of merchandize. (Exod., xxxv, 25 ; 1st Kings, ii, 
19; Prov., xxxi, 18, 34; Acts, ix, 39.) However, among the 
Hebrews, weaving was not exclusively in the hands of females. 
(Exod., xxxv, 35.) In this they imitated, to a certain extent, 
the custom of Egypt, where men, almost to the entire exclusion 
of females, practised the art. For if, on the Egyptian monu- 
ments a woman is sometimes represented weaving, it is only 
an exception confirming the rule. So much being done at 
home among the Hebrews, money or hire was not paid to 
artificers, unless to those who executed difficult kinds of 
work — such as the makers of chariots, stonecutters, sculp- 
tors, metal-founders, those who executed various works in 
gold, silver, or brass ; finally, potters, and other such artificers. 
(Judg., xvii, 4; Isa., xxix, 16; xxx, 14; Jer., xxviii, 23; 
Zach., xii, 13.) These artists, who were by no means slaves, 
as among the Greeks and Eomans, (Jer., xxiv, 1 ; xxix, 3 ; 4th 
Kings, xxiv, 14,) were multiplied exceedingly in the opulent 
times, under the kings. In the time of David and Solomon there 
were not wanting those who could build the palaces and temple, 
at the same time they profited by the lessons of the Tyrian work- 
men, who were much their superiors. (1st Paral., xiv, 1 ; xxii, 
15.) In the history of the Hebrews mention is made of many 
instruments, and of many artificial works in metal, which prove 
the existence among the people of other arts besides those already 
particularized. 

During the captivity, as the Hebrews did not everywhere 



OF THE A UTS AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



417 



find fertile fields to cultivate, many of them addicted themselves 
to the arts and merchandize ; and the custom thus adopted be- 
came so common among them in the progress of time, in the 
various countries through which they were dispersed, that we 
find the Talmudists laying it down as a precept to parents not to 
neglect to teach their children some mechanical art or trade ; 
wherefore, in the Talmud, mention is made of several even 
learned Jews who practised some mechanical art ; and in the 
New Testament we see how Joseph — the foster-father of 
Christ — was a tradesman (tstctojv a carpenter) ; Simon of Joppe, 
mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, (ix, 43, xx, 32,) was a 
tanner ; Alexander, the opponent of St. Paul, and considered 
learned among the Jews, was a coppersmith, (2nd Tim., iv, 14,) 
and St. Paul himself, and Aquila, were tentmakers. At a 
more recent age, however, the Rabbins held certain occupations 
to be infamous ; for we find that the drivers of asses and camels, 
barbers, rowers or sailors, shepherds and inn-keepers, are classed 
by them with robbers. Among the Greeks, those who belonged 
to the higher trades, were, even in the days of the Apostles, 
joined together by a certain bond of union. (Acts, xix, 23 ; com- 
pare Xenophon, Cyrop., viii, 2, 4.) What we have said hithert i 
regards the mechanic arts. As to the liberal arts, if we except 
music, it can hardly be said that, in the strict sense of the word, 
they were cultivated by the Hebrews. However, writers on 
biblical antiquities, taking the liberal arts in a wide sense, usually 
notice under this head the following subjects : — 

First. — Writing. As we have treated of this art, its state, 
and progress among the Hebrews, in an earlier part of this 
work, we shall dispense with any further notice of the subject 
here. (See Dissertation the 2nd.) 

Second. — Poetry is indeed an art, yet not such an art as one 
is supposed to refer to when he speaks simply of the arts, whether 
liberal or mechanical. At the sametime, according to what we 
have just now said, since others, when noticing the state of the 
liberal arts among the Hebrews, have taken occasion to speak of 
their poetry, we shall also make a few observations upon the 
subject in this place. That the Hebrews cultivated poetry is 
manifest from the inspection of the bible itself. Thus, it is im- 
possible to read the Psalms, even in our Latin translation, which 
is taken from the Septuagint, without being forcibly struck with 
the poetical character of the composition. But we no longer 
know what were precisely all the constituents of the Hebrew 
poetry, and, hence, some have indulged their fancy too much in 
this inquiry. What appears certain is, that the poetical parts 
of the bible are distinguished from the rest of the book by a 

2 E 



« 



418 



OF THE ARTS AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



certain elevation of style and sentiment, and by what is termed 
parallelism of the members of the sentences. This parallelism is 
a certain resemblance between the members of a period, so that 
in these different members things answer to things, and words 
to words, according to a kind of rule or measure. The parallelism 
may be either solely in the construction or form of the members 
of the sentence, or it may be at the sametime in their form and 
in their meaning. 

As an example of parallelism in form solely, we may adduce 
the following : — 

" The justices of the Lord are right, rejoicing hearts." 

" The commandment of the Lord is lightsome, enlightening the eyes." 

(Psalm xviii, 9.) 

Parallelism of meaning is added to parallelism of form when 
one member of the period or sentence illustrates the meaning 
of another. 2sow one member may illustrate the meaning of 
another member of the period, either by expressing the same 
thought in different words, and this is termed synonymous paral- 
lelism : or a member may illustrate the meaning of another 
member of the sentence by expressing an opposite thought or 
sentiment to that contained in the first — and this is called 
antithetic parallelism. The synonymous parallelism is very 
frequent : take as an example of it : — 

" What is man that thou art mindful of him; 
Or the son of man, that thou visitest him." (Psalm viii, 5.) 

The antithetic parallelism is less customary. The following 
will exemplify it : — 

" For evil doers, shall be cut off : 
But they that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the land." 

(Psalm xxxvi, 9.) 

All these kinds of parallelism occur in a variety of ways in 
the poetical parts of the bible, according to the number and the 
arrangement of the members in different periods. Sometimes a 
period will consist but of two members in immediate connexion : 
sometimes a third member is added, unlike either of the others : 
sometimes there are four members, of which the first answers to 
the third, and the second to the fourth : sometimes there are 
even five members, of which the two first and the two last are 
parallel, and the middle one is unlike ; or the first answers to 
the third, and the second to the fourth, whilst the fifth is unlike. 
And there is yet another kind of parallel arrangement of the mem- 
bers of a period, which writers on this subject point out in the 
poetical books of scripture. It is found where a period containing, 



OF THE AETS AHOKG THE HEBREWS. 



419 



let us say, four members, has them so arranged, that the first mem- 
ber answers to the fourth, and the second to the third. If a period 
constructed upon this plan, should contain six members — then, 
the first and sixth would be parallel, also the second and fifth, 
and lastly, the third and fourth. This is called the introverted 
parallelism. To this matter of parallelism we have made refer- 
ence before in the dissertation upon biblical hermeneutics. 

Third. — Music. Singing is coeval with poetry. Instruments 
of music were invented by Jubal. (Gen., iv, 21.) Music after- 
wards progressed pari passu with poetry, and the poet himself 
sang his own poem and accompanied it with a musical instru- 
ment. And hence, as long as poetry flourished, it cannot be 
doubted but music was diligently cultivated. 

The Hebrews used music upon their festival days, whether 
domestic, civil, or religious ; as, at the nuptial solemnity, on the 
anniversary of the birthday, on the days upon which their 
enemies were conquered, at the installation of their kings, in the 
divine worship, and on the journey to the temple to celebrate 
the greater festivals. (Isai., xxx, 29.) In the sacred Tabernacle 
and afterwards in the temple, thu Levites were the musicians ; 
in other places, however, it was lawful for every one without 
distinction to play upon musical instruments ; only the sacred 
silver trumpets were reserved to the priests, who by sounding 
them proclaimed the festival-days, convoked the council of the 
chiefs, and in war called the people together, or gave them 
warning to retreat. (Numb., x, 1, 10.) The music of the sacred 
Tabernacle was placed upon an improved footing by David, who 
divided the Levites into twenty-four classes. These were to sing 
the psalms, and to accompany them on the instruments. Each 
class performed the duty for a week, and was subject to a pre- 
fect. All the classes at the sametime were subject to trine 
directors. (1st Paral., xvi, 5 ; xxiii, 4, 5 ; xxv, 1-31 ; comp., 
2nd Paral., v, 12, 13.) This order passed to the temple- worship 
under Solomon, and was continued down to the destruction of 
Jerusalem ; for, although it was sometimes interrupted under the 
idolatrous kings, yet in a succeeding reign we find it again restored 
(2nd Paral., v, 1 2-17 ; xxix, 27 ; xxxv, 15) ; nay, even after 
the captivity it was restored, (1st Esd., iii, 10; 1st Alach., iv, 
54; xiii, 51,) although the music of this later age, as well as 
the poetry, did not recover that degree of perfection which it 
had acquired before the captivity. 

The instruments of music were either the stringed instru- 
ments, wind instruments — or, in fine, those instruments from 
which the sounds were elicited by beating upon them, which may 
be termed the pulsatile instruments. 



420 



OF THE ARTS AilONG THE HEBREWS. 



The stringed instruments were : — First, the harp, ^YDS 
(kinnor), a very ancient instrument. (Genesis, iv, 21.) It 
resembled onr modern instrument of the same name. In the 
time of Josephus it had ten strings, and was not at that time 
played upon with the hand, but struck with a plectrum. (Josep. 
Antiq.* vii, 12.) 

Second. — The psaltery, (nebel), is first mentioned in the 
Psalms of David : it obtained its name from its resemblance to a 
bottle or flaggon : it was played upon by the ringers. From this 
instrument— that is, from the Greek name of the neb el y the 
Book of Psalms has received the name of Psaltery, 

The wind instruments were — 

First, the organ (hug gab) (Gen., iv, 21) : originally its 
construction is supposed to have been the same with that of the 
pastoral pipe, which was composed of a number of pipes placed 
side by side, and firmly joined together, and decreasing in length 
from one side of the instrument to the other. It nearly resembled 
the 6voiy% or pipe of Pan among the Greeks. Second, third, 
fourth, the ehalil, (Vbn) nechiloth (nib^TO) and neheb pp2) 
were pipes or flutes of various kinds. 

Filth, the horn, or crooked trumpet, was a very ancient 
instrument ; it was originally made of the horn of the ox; after- 
wards the ram's horn was used for the same purpose. The horn 
was chiefly used in war. Sixth, the straight trumpet does not 
require any particular description : its form is sufficiently under- 
stood, 

The Pulsatile instruments were — 

First, the tabour or tambarine (toph), which was composed 
of a circular hoop, either of wood or brass, upon which was 
stretched a piece of skin tensely drawn : all round the hoop 
were suspended rings or little bells. The tabour was held in 
the left hand, and beaten to notes of music with the right. The 
ladies in the East to this day dance to the sound of this instru- 
ment. The earliest notice of it which we meet in scripture 
occurs in Genesis, xxxi, 27. 

Second, the tseltselim (cymbals), in Hebrew D^b^b^ consisted 
of two large and broad plates of brass, which being struck against 
each other, made a hollow ringing sound. They were of a form 
exactly resembling those which are now to be seen in military 
bands, though smaller, being only seven inches, or five inches 
and a-half in diameter. 

Third, the sistrum D^2372E (menahanehim,) was a rod of iron 
formed into an oval or triangular figure, and furnished with a 
number of moveable rings ; so that, when shaken, or struck with 
another rod of iron, it emitted the desired sound. The Hebrew 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES, ETC. 



421 



name has the same signification as the Greek Gzivrgov from cs/w 
to shake, agitate. 

As the limits of our work do not permit us to dwell upon each 
particular, we shall content ourselves with the foregoing notice 
of the principal instruments of music mentioned in the scripture. 

Fourth. — It is usual to notice the dance in connexion with 
music. Dancing has been more or less practised by all nations, 
even from the earliest times. 

It is mentioned repeatedly in scripture, and what Jahn 
{Archceologia) says about the mode of conducting the dance, agrees 
very well with the allusions in the sacred text, viz. — that, one 
of the women engaged in the dance led the way, and the other 
women followed in a circle, imitating the movements of the 
leader, which movements were regulated by the music of the 
toph (timbrel or tambarine,) upon which these dancing women at 
the sametime played, (see Exodus, xv, 20,) where Mary, the 
sister of Aaron, led the dance, (Judges, xi, 34,) where the daugh- 
ter of Jephte met him with timbrels and with dances, (1st Kings, 
xviii, 6,) where the women came to greet David after he had 
slain the Philistine. (See also Psalm, lxvii, 26.) It is remarkable 
that in these places the allusion or reference is to women merely 
as engaged in the dance. At the sametime, that the dance was 
not exclusively practised by females appears from the case of 
David, who danced before the ark. (2nd Kings, v, 16.) It is 
observed that at the present time the dance is infamous in the 
East, on account of the indecent gestures with which it is accom- 
panied. In conclusion, we may observe, that in the history of 
the death of the Baptist, (Mark, vi, 21 and following,) we have 
an instance of the evil effects to which profane dancing can lead. 



CHAPTER Y. 

STATE OF THE SCIENCES AMONG THE HEBREWS. 

The arts and sciences are intimately connected, and, therefore, 
both have had the same origin. In reality, the sciences have 
taken their rise from that operation of the mind by which the 
arts were reduced to certain laws ; and, hence, we can trace back 
the history of the sciences to the remotest antiquity. No doubt, 
the state of society which followed the confusion of the languages 
was not favourable to the progress of the sciences ; yet, even 
then, they did not disappear, as is sufficiently manifest in the 
case of the Hebrew people from the scripture itself. 



422 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES 



We have not a sufficient record of the state of learning among 
the ancient Hebrews of the earlier times to be able to mark with 
precision the progress of the sciences among them. However, if 
we come down to the reign of David, we may reasonably con- 
clude, from what the scripture teaches us regarding that reign, 
that during it the sciences were carefully cultivated. Eut it was 
under Solomon that they must have made vast progress — that 
prince who had received from God a degree of wisdom so great 
that he far surpassed all the Easterns and all the Egyptians in 
knowledge. To skill in poetry he united a profound acquaintance 
with natural history ; insomuch that they came from all coun- 
tries to Jerusalem ; and even kings sent the ablest of their sub- 
jects that they might profit by his lessons. (3rd Kings, iv, 29-34.) 
It is certain that such an example must have excited among the 
Hebrews a happy emulation, and imbued them with a love of 
science. They appear to have applied themselves particularly to 
the doctrine of the duties of life, philosophy viewed in reference 
to religion, their own history, and natural history. After Solo- 
mon the Hebrews remained almost stationary as regarded the 
sciences. When captives at Eabylon they borrowed something 
from the people to whom they were subject. Some ideas they 
also, at a later period, borrowed from the Greeks. 

We shall now say something of those sciences in particular 
upon which the writers on the ancient history of the Hebrews 
have specially dwelt. 

First. — Of History, Genealogies, and Chronology. The study 
which appears to have chiefly occupied the mind of the ancient 
Eastern nations is, certainly, that of history. The scripture it- 
self furnishes a remarkable proof of this, since it presents 
to us, in their chronological order, all the principal events 
which appertain to the history of the ancient people of 
God, from the creation of the world down to within a compara- 
tively short period before the coming of Christ. The same 
scripture, moreover, makes mention of a great number of histori- 
cal books, and of many monuments, ornamented with inscrip- 
tions, and raised to perpetuate the memory of remarkable facts. 
This attention to the science of history was not peculiar to the 
Hebrews. 2sot only had the Egyptians a class of priests charged 
with the writing of their history, but Babylonians, the 
Assyrians, the Persians, and the Tyrians faithfully kept the 
annals of their respective nations. Eor the most part, among 
the several peoples of remote antiquity, the historiographers 
were exclusively of the priestly class. But at a more recent 
period, when kings had their private historians, this rule was 
deviated from. That which proves, above everything else, the 



AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



423 



esteem in which the Hebrews held historical science is the care 
with which the prophets, whose mission appeared to have been 
for quite another purpose, have marked clown in their writings 
the different events which occurred in their own time. In these 
ancient histories recorded in the bible, where chronological dates 
are not formally given, their absence is supplied by means of 
chronological genealogies, in which the number of years occupied 
by the genealogy is given, and a fixed period is marked at which 
the genealogical series commences — such as the creation or the 
deluge. The Hebrews, who considered it an honour to perpe- 
tuate their name, and who knew that the genealogical tables were 
the surest means of doing so, were never, from the earliest time, 
without their Shoterim or public genealogists, whose office it was 
to keep these tables, and to inscribe the names upon them. 

jSTot only the Hebrews, but also, according to Herodotus and 
Diodorus Siculus, the Egyptians gave a preference to the mode 
of counting by generations, three of which made a hundred 
years. In the time of Abraham, however, when men lived to a 
greater age, an hundred years made one generation. This is 
clear from Gen., (xv, 13-16,) and from the fact, that Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob having dwelt two hundred and fifteen years in 
the land of Chanaan, this time is counted as only two genera- 
tions. 

Second. — Of Arithmetic , and Mathematics in general. See- 
ing the close relation which mathematics have with agriculture, 
navigation, commerce, and, in general, with all the arts, it can- 
not be doubted but they were cultivated among the Hebrews, 
although the scripture does not make express mention of them. 
As to arithmetic and geometry for example, the practice of their 
primary operations, at least, must have had its beginning in the 
earliest times. As soon as people were subjected to a regular 
form of government arithmetic was necessary for them. The 
institution of the right of property is as ancient as the origin of 
societies. As soon as the division of lands was introduced, and 
the distinction of mine and thine, men required to know how to 
count, to weigh, and to measure. Arithmetic, consequently, 
became necessary, as well on account of its own peculiar opera- 
tions as on account of its connection with geometry, mechanics, 
and astronomy, the existence of which essentially depends upon 
the art of calculating. The method of counting by tens of 
units ; tens of tens, or hundreds ; tens of hundreds, or thousands ; 
and tens of thousands, or myriads ; a method which we meet 
with in the books of Moses, (Gen., xxiv, 60 ; Lev., xxvi, 8 ; 
Deut., xxxii, 33,) is in reality an undeniable proof that 



424 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES 



arithmetic was carefully cultivated among the Hebrews from 
time immemorial. 

Third. — Of Astronomy. The origin of this science also goes 
back to the earliest times among the Hebrews. It had its com- 
mencement in some simple observations made upon the movements 
of the planets. We see by the way in which the duration of 
the lives of the first patriarchs is calculated in Genesis, as well 
as by the manner in which 'the circumstances of the deluge are 
there explained, that, from the first age of the world certain 
methods of measuring time must have been known. Besides, 
how could the Hebrew people remain an entire stranger to a 
science which, independently of its own extreme utility, was 
cultivated with so much care by the Egyptians, the Babylonians, 
and the Phenicians ? In fine, the names of stars and constella- 
tions, which are to be met with in several books of the scripture, 
furnish another proof that the Hebrews were not unacquainted 
with astronomy. (4th Kings, xxiii, 5 ; Isai., xiii, 10 ; xxiv, 12 ; 
Amos, v, 8-26 ; Job, ix, 10 ; xxxvii, 31, 32.) At the same time 
it does not appear that the Hebrews were great proficients in 
this science ; nor was the study of it much encouraged by the 
laws of Moses, because among the Gentiles it was uniformly 
found united with the superstition of astrology, and the worship 
of false gods. 

Fourth.- — Of the Division of Time. There is no doubt but 
their knowledge of astronomy assisted the Hebrews in their 
division of time, of which we shall now treat. The following 
divisions are frequently referred to in the Old Testament as well 
as in the New : day, night, week, month, and year. 

First. — As to days, they are divided into natural and civil 
days. The natural day is the time from sunrise to sunset — or 
rather it is the time of light, as opposed to the natural night, or 
the time of darkness. This day varies in length, not only in 
different places, but also at different seasons in the same place. 
The civil day contains twenty-four hours ; that is to say, it is a 
full solar day. It has its beginnitig and ending determined 
according to the peculiar custom of each country. The Baby- 
lonians counted their full days of twenty-four hours, from sun- 
rise to the following sunrise. People of other countries, on the 
contrary, have counted them from sunset to sunset. At present, 
throughout Christendom generally, the usage is to count from 
one midnight to the following. The Hebrews, as well for that 
which concerned religion as for civil affairs, counted their days 
from one sunset to another, (Lev., xxiii, 32,) a usage which the 
Catholic Church has consecrated in the matter of the celebration 
of the divine office. They were accustomed to designate an 



A^TOXG THE HEBREWS, 



425 



entire day, that is to say, the space of twenty-four hours, by the 
words evening and morning : sometimes, in fine, they gave the 
names day and night to parts of the day and of the night. (Gen., 
i, 5 ; viii, 22 : Matt., xii, 40.) jNow, as to the natural day, 
that is the time of light — the first men distinguished three 
points of time in this day, viz., the morning, the mid-day or 
noon, and the evening : that is to say, when the sun appeared 
over the horizon, then was morning ; when he appeared at the 
highest elevation above the horizon, which was in the midst of 
his course, then was mid-day; and when he set, or disappeared 
from the horizon, that was evening. These three points 
marked the limits of three divisions of the day. Before the in- 
vention of timepieces, the Jews divided the day into six unequal 
parts, a practice which the Arabians follow to the present time : 
First, The Aurora, or the morning twilight ; Second, The morn- 
ing, or the period which elapses from the time when the sun 
shows itself above the horizon, until, Third, The heat of the dag, 
which begins to be felt about nine o'clock, and continues until, 
Fourth, The mid-day, or noon, which marks the period until, 
Fifth, The time of the breeze, which, in the warm countries of the 
East, blows each day from a short time before sunset until 
evening. Sixth, The evening, which began at the setting of the 
sun, and ended at the moment when darkness covered the earth. 
The evening was divided into two parts, called, in consequence, 
the two evenings. The Caraite Jews, and the Samaritans, main- 
tain that the first evening commences at the setting of the sun, 
and the second at the time when darkness overspreads the earth ; 
the Rabbinical Jews, on the other hand, will have it that the 
first commences at the moment when the sun is on its decline, 
and the second at sunset : and thus they make the first evening 
to precede the sunset. The time which elapsed between one 
evening and the other was called between the two evenings. 
Hours, such as we understand them, do not appear to have been 
known to the ancient Hebrews. In order to count the portions 
of time which have some analogy with what we call hours, the 
Hebrews at first used sundials ; afterwards they had recourse to 
a more useful invention, the hourglass, which, it appears, was 
thus used : on a vase filled with water, a small vessel, somewhat 
like a saucer was placed ; this was made of very thin copper, and 
pierced with a hole, almost imperceptible, through which the 
water gradually gained admission, until the vessel was filled, and 
sunk to the bottom of the vase : this operation required a fixed 
portion of time, and thus they were enabled to mark their hours 
at all periods of the day or night. Such was the clepsydra, or 
water-clock, which many suppose to have been in use among the 



426 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES. 



Jews. At a later period the Jews divided the time of the sun's 
presence above the horizon into four parts, and these they sub- 
divided, so as to make twelve hours ; then each of these four 
divisions contained three hours. But since the period of the 
sun's presence above the horizon varied throughout the year, 
so that in summer this period was much longer than in winter ; 
consequently, these hours were of a variable length. These four 
divisions of the day were called the first, third, sixth, and ninth 
hours. The first hour commenced at sunrise, and continued tor 
three hours, that is, half of the time from sunrise to mid-day : 
the third hour began three hours after sunrise, and ended at 
mid-day : the sixth hour began at mid- day, and lasted for three 
hours : then commenced the ninth hour, which finished at sun- 
set ; so that the last hour of the fourth division was the twelfth 
hour of the day. There is question of the third, sixth, and ninth 
hours, in the Acts of the Apostles, as being the time marked for 
prayer. (Acts- ii, 15 ; iii, 1 ; x, 3, 9.) It is, also, according to 
this fourfold division of the clay that St. ]\Iark counts the hours, 
(xv, 33.) Again, as to the division of the day into twelve hours, 
we find our Lord, in the Gospel according to St. John (xi, 9), 
asking, " Are there not twelve hours in the day ? " It is after 
this division that the Evangelist just mentioned reckons the 
hours, (xix, 14.) 

Before the Babylonian captivity, the Hebrews divided the 
night into three watches only : the first, which is called in the 
Lamentations, (ii, 19,) the beginning of the w at dies, comprised the 
time between sunset and midnight; the second, or the midnight 
watch, (Judg., vii, 19), lasted until cock-crowing, that is about 
our three o'clock in the morning; the third, or the morning 
watch, (Exod., xiv, 24,) from cock-crowing until sunrise. It is 
very probable that the watches which the Levites kept in the 
Tabernacle and the temple were the origin of these divisions of 
the night ; but from our Redeemer's time, the Jews, like the 
Bomans, divided the night into four watches. The first, which com- 
menced at sunset, lasted three hours, and was called the evening 
watch, or even (Alark, xi, 19) ; the second watch extended to the 
middle of the night, and on this account was called midnight 
(Matt., xxv, 6) ; the third continued until about our three 
o'clock in the morning — this was the cock-crowing (Alark, xiii, 
35) ; in fine, the fourth finished with sunrise : this watch was 
called earlg in the morning. (John, viii, 2.) These watches had 
other names also. 

The name of shabooang or week, is very ancient, 

since it is found even in Genesis, (xxix, 27, 28.) It signifies a 
period of seven days. The seventh day was to the Hebrews a 



AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



4:27 



day sanctified and consecrated to rest ; hence the name of Sab- 
bath, which it has always borne. The Sabbath was the princi- 
pal day of the week : the Hebrews gave also to the entire week 
the name of Sabbath. (Luke, xviii, 12.) 

The days had no particular names : they were called the first, 
second, third, &c, of the Sabbath; answering to our Sunday, 
Monday, Tuesday, &c, but the seventh day, which was the 
Sabbath properly speaking, corresponded to our Saturday. It 
was among the Egyptians that the days of the week were first 
designated by the names of the sun, moon, Mercury, Mars, &e. 
As the Hebrews often use the same word to express one and first, 
the expression one of the Sabbath, as we have it in the Vulgate 
una sabbati or sabbatoram, signifies with them the first day of the 
week. (Mark, xvi, 19 ; Luke xxiv, 1 ; John xx, I.) The Hel- 
lenist J ews called the sixth day of the week-a^atrxe-j^ (parasceve, ) 
a word which signifies preparation. It was, indeed, on this day 
that the Jews prepared their food for the Sabbath ; the making 
ready or dressing of food being forbidden on the Sabbath itself. 
The other Jews called the sixth day of the week the vigil of the 
Sabbath ; this vigil commenced properly at the ninth hour, that 
is to say, about our three o'clock in the afternoon. Besides the 
weeks of seven days, the Hebrews had also, First — weeks of iveeks, 
that is, periods of forty-nine days, one of which periods elapsed 
from the feast of Pasch until that of Pentecost ; this last feast fell 
on the fiftieth day after the Pasch, and was called the feast of weeks. 
(Deut., xvi, 9, 10.) Second — iveeks of years, (Levit, xxv,)that 
is, periods of seven years : the last year of each such period was 
called the sabbatical year ; and thirdly, weeks of sabbatical years, 
that is to say, periods of forty-nine years, each of which was ter- 
minated by the year of the" Jubilee, which fell in the fiftieth 
year. The historian Josephus mentions, moreover, a period of 
twelve Jubilees, that is to say, of six hundred years, (Antiq., 1, 
3,) but of this the scriptures nowhere speak. 

The regularity with which the moon after a certain period 
recommenced her course, no doubt suggested to the first men 
the division of montlis. Twenty-nine days and a half, therefore, 
the period of the moon's course, was about the time assigned to 
each month. What we have here said becomes more evident by 
attending to the Hebrew •words, which are used to designate 
month: these are literally the moon TT^ ((yerah,) and the begin- 
ning of the moon, Win (chodesh.) In the commencement, the 
Hebrew months had no particular names, they were simply de- 
signated,//^, second, third, &c. (Gen., vii, 11 ; viii, 4, 5 ; Levit., 
xxiii, 34.) Afterwards they acquired distinct names : thus in 
the books of Moses, the first month of the year is called Abib, 



428 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES 



signifying green, from the green ears of corn at that season ; for 
it began about the vernal equinox. The second month was called 
Zio or ziv ; in which the foundation of Solomon's temple was 
laid. (3rd Kings, vi, 1.) The seventh month was styled Etha- 
nim. (3rd Kings, viii, 2.) The eighth month, Bui. (3rd Kings, 
vi, 38.) Concerning the origin of these appellations, critics are 
by no means agreed. During the captivity the Hebrews adopted 
the Chaldean and Babylonian names of the months : and as the 
lunar months have but twenty-nine days and a-half, they allotted 
to the first month, thirty days, to the second, twenty-nine, and 
so for the rest, making them alternately of thirty and twenty- 
nine days. As the Hebrews had two kinds of year, the one 
sacred and the other civil, the following are the names of the 
months in the order which they held in the sacred or ecclesias- 
tical year : — 

1. Nisan, formerly Abib, of 30 days, answering to part of March 

and April. 

2. Ziv or Jyar, of 29 days, answering to part of April and May. 

3. Sivan of 30 days, May and June.* 

4. Thammouz of 29 days, June and July. 

5. Ab of 30 days, July and August. 

6. Eloul of 29 days, August and September. 

7. Tishri of 30 days, September and October. 

8. Bui, afterwards called Marchesvan, of 29 days, answering to 

October and November. 

9. Casleu of 30 days, November and December. 

10. Tebeth of 29 days, December and January. 

11. Shebat of 30 days, January and February. 

12. Adar of 29 days, February and March. 

This was the order of the months in the sacred year, and 
according to this order they regulated the festivals and all that 
concerned religion. Besides this they had also a civil year, 
which they followed in the regulation of civil matters. The 
civil year began with the month Tishri. Prom what has been 
said, it follows that the Jewish year was lunar, consisting of 
twelve lunations, or of 354 days and eight hours. In order then 
to guard against the confusion in the time of observing the festi- 
vals which would soon arise in consequence of the difference 
between the solar and lunar year, the Jews, as often as was 
necessary, added a whole month to the year. This addition was 
made commonly once in three years, and sometimes once in two 
years. The intercalary month was added at the end of the 
ecclesiastical year, after the month Adar, and was, therefore, 

* That is, Sivxm corresponded to a part of our May and J une, and so of 
the other months. 



A310XG TFE HEBREWS. 



429 



called ve-adar, a second Adar. This month consisted of twenty- 
nine days. 

Fifth. — Of Geometry, Mechanics, and Geography. "We read 
in Genesis of the measurement of lines, (Gen., vi, 15, 16,) and 
of planes. (Gen., xlvii, 20, 27.) In the book of Job, and of 
Josue, mention is made of the measuring line, brought from 
Egypt, where, according to all ancient testimonies, geometry was 
invented, and where the inundations of the Nile made the cul- 
tivation of this science a matter of necessity. In this country 
the Hebrews also imbibed as much of the science as enabled 
them afterwards to delineate geographically the land of Chanaan, 
and to divide it with the measuring line. The weighing of the 
sides mentioned in Genesis, (xxiii, 15, 16,) proves, that at least 
some rudiments of the measurement of solids were known to the 
Hebrews in those times. 

All the arts which minister to the wants of man are supplied 
by mechanics with the instruments necessary for this end. This 
consideration alone would suffice to prove the antiquity of this 
science among the Hebrews, if the same thing was not moreover 
solidly established by the construction of the ark of Noe, and of 
the tower of Babel, and by the use of several instruments and 
machines indispensable for the execution of works of this kind, 
which required, as well as the machines and instruments them- 
selves, some notions of the science of mechanics. Let us add, 
that these first ideas must have developed themselves during the 
sojourn of the Hebrews in Egypt, where, as the scripture itself 
in several places shows, they were continually put in practice — 
and must have acquired a new increase in proportion as the state 
of the Hebrew nation was formed and perfected. 

As to Geography — the most ancient records of scripture prove 
that the people of those early times were not strangers to this 
science. At the very first division of lands and settlements it 
was necessary to know and determine the distance and the rela- 
tive position of different localities. The first travellers must 
have observed exactly the number of days which it had taken 
them to pass from one place to another. Often do we meet in 
scripture with this expression, such a city is distant from such 
another city, so many days journey. The Egyptians must have 
known geography before the time of Joseph, since Egypt had 
already been divided into a certain number of provinces or de- 
partments. (Gen., xli, 46, 57.) The holy scripture supplies us 
with a very precise testimony of the antiquity of geographical 
knowledge in the description of the terrestrial paradise. When 
we examine attentively the manner in which Moses speaks of 
the abode of the first man, we recognise in it all the traits which 



430 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES 



characterise a geographical description. He says, that this gar- 
den was situated in the country of Eden, eastward ; that there 
went out from Eden a river, of which the course divided itself 
into four arms ; he describes the course of these four arms, and 
names the countries which they watered. Moses does more, he 
enters into a detail of the different productions which were 
found in each of these countries. These he specifies even with 
great particularity. The sacred historian is not content with 
saying, that the land of Hevila produced gold : he adds, that the 
gold of this country is very good. It is there, also, he continues, 
that are found the bdellium and the onyx stone. Such details 
prove that long before the time of Moses geography had made 
very considerable progress. The exactness, also, with which Moses 
describes the situation and names of the cities and countries 
through which Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob travelled, and the 
several details which he gives regarding them, furnish another 
proof of what we are here insisting upon. But one fact, which 
alone would be sufficient to show what progress geographical 
science had made, is the circumstantial detail of the division of 
the land of promise, commenced by Moses and finished under 
Josue. (Deut., iii, 12 ; Josue, xiii & xviii.) 

Sixth. — Of Medicine. The diseases to which the human 
frame is subject would naturally lead man to try to alleviate or 
to remove them : hence sprang the art of medicine. In the 
early ages of the world, indeed, there could not be much occasion 
for a science which is now so necessary to the health and hap- 
piness of mankind. The simplicity of their manners, the plain- 
ness of their diet, their temperance, and their active life, 
naturally tended to strengthen the body, and to afford a greater 
share of health than what we now enjoy. Anciently at Baby- 
lon the sick, when they were first attacked with a disease, were 
left in the streets for the purpose of learning from those who 
might pass the way what practices or what medicines had been 
of assistance to them when afflicted with a similar disease. This 
was, perhaps, done also in other countries. The Egyptians car- 
ried their sick into the temples of Serapis ; the Greeks carried 
theirs into those of JEsculapius. In these places there were 
preserved written statements of the means by which various 
cures had been effected. With the aid of these recorded reme- 
dies the art of healing assumed, in the progress of time, the 
aspect of a science. It assumed such a form first in Egypt, and 
at a more recent period in Greece ; but it was not long before those 
of the former were surpassed in excellence by the physicians of 
the latter country. Physicians are mentioned in Genesis, (1, 2 ; 
Exod., xxxi, 19 ; Job., xxiii, 14.) Some acquaintance with 



AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



431 



chirurgical operations is implied in the rite of circumcision. 
(Gen., xvii, 11, 14.) There is ample evidence that the Israelites 
had some acquaintance with the internal structure of the human 
system, although it does not appear that dissections of the human 
body for medical purposes were made until as late as the time of 
the Ptolemys. The medical art, among the Hebrews, was com- 
mitted to the priests, who were bound ex officio to take cognizance 
of leprosies. (Levit., xiii, 1, 14 ; Deut., xxiv, 8, 9.) Physicians 
are elsewhere mentioned, who do not appear, all, to have been 
priests. (1st Kings, xvi, 16; 3rd Kings, i, 2-4; xv, 33; 4th 
Kings, viii, 29; ix, 15; Isa., i, 6; Jerem., viii, 22; Ezech., 
xxx, 21; Prov., iii, 18; xi, 30; xii, 18; xvi, 15; xxix, 1.) 
The reason why king Asa is blamed for having sought help 
from the physicians and not from God, (2 Paral., xvi, 16,) is 
because the physicians of that time had often recourse to super- 
stitious practices instead of simple medicines. At a later period 
the Hebrew physicians read the Greek medical authors, and not 
only made progress in science, but also increased in numbers. 
(Eccles., xxxviii, 1, 12 ; Mark v, 26 ; Luke, iv, 23; v, 31 ; viii, 
43; Josephus, A?itiq., xvii, 6, § 5.) 

Of the Diseases mentioned in tlie Scripture we do not intend 
to treat in detail ; but there are one or two of these which claim 
a special notice. 

And first, the leprosy, regarding which the Mosaic statutes 
so minutely treat : — There is no question but this disease is a 
native of warm climates : its birthplace is considered to have 
been Egypt, or that part of Asia which is washed by the Medi- 
terranean and the Keel Sea. It is an infectious disease of slow 
and imperceptible progress, beginning very insidiously and gently 
— for the most part with one little bright spot, which causes no 
trouble, though no means will make it disappear — but increasing 
with time until it ultimately becomes a thick scab widely spread 
over the body ; and thus the disease becomes confirmed. In the 
East, we are told, that this disease is attended with the most 
formidable symptoms ; such as mortification and separation of 
whole limbs ; and when arrived at a certain stage that it is 
altogether incurable. 

Some are of opinson, however, that the terrible description 
of the Jewish leprosy, which we often find given by authors, is 
to be explained by the fact that these authors confounded the 
disease unwarrantably with another, which is called Elephan- 
tiasis, and which in the middle ages was very common over all 
Europe, and was truly frightful, mutilating the toes and dis- 
figuring the whole body. This disease, which throughout 
Europe, was commonly designated by the name of Lepra, or 



432 



STATE OF THE SCIENCES 



leprosy, was called by the Greeks, Elephantiasis, because the 
skin of the person affected with it was thought to resemble that 
of an elephant, in dark colour, ruggedness, and insensibility ; or 
as some have thought, because the foot, after the loss of the 
toes, when the hollow of the sole is filled up and the ankle en- 
larged, resembles the foot of an elephant. One thing appears 
certain that at the present time we cannot know to what precise 
extent the Jewish leprosy partook of the character of elephan- 
tiasis. The holy fathers do not omit to tell us, that as leprosy 
was a type of sin, so the rite of purifying the leper was typical 
of these sacraments of the 5ew Law by which the soul is purified 
from the state of sin. 

Perhaps, among all the cases of disease mentioned in scrip- 
ture the one which at first sight it appears most difficult to 
explain is that which we find recorded of jNabuchodonosor in the 
book of Daniel, of which we shall here say a few words. We 
read then in the book of Daniel, (chapter iv,) that Nabuchodo- 
nosor had a dream w r hich Daniel interpreted for him, declaring to 
him that this was the meaning of it, viz., that he ( Nabuehodonosor) 
should be driven out from the society of men, and should eat grass 
like an ox, and that when seven times, that is seven years, 
should have passed over him in this state, he would be restored 
to his kingdom. And all this happened accordingly. And 
Nabuchodonosor says, after the seven years were finished, that 
his figure returned to him. It is here asked, what kind of trans- 
formation did ISabuchodonosor suffer, and how all the history is 
to be understood. We answer that JNabuchodonosor was not 
simply changed into an ox, nor was his body properly changed 
into the body of an ox — the mind remaining the same : but what 
happened to him, according to the common opinion of interpreters, 
was : that by the just judgment of God he was seized with a cer- 
tain kind of madness, under the influence of which he fancied him- 
self transformed into an ox, and therefore he fed upon grass like 
cattle. The ancients called persons affected with this species of 
madness KuxavOguwoi (wolf-men), because they often fancied that 
they were wolves, and imitated these animals. Hence, the 
disease is termed XvxccvQpoo-ia, in English, Lycanthropy. 
Modern instances are not wanting of this species of madness. 
According to this opinion, everything said of jSabuchodonosor in 
the chapter of Daniel referred to is well explained. He was wet 
with the deiv of heaven, for, in his madness he cared not for cloth- 
ing, whilst the warm climate of Babylon prevented this manner 
of life from proving fatal to him. He did eat grass like an ox. 
The state of his imagination, which made him think that since 
he was an ox this was his proper food, had a great influence in 



AMOXG THE HEBREWS. 



433 



enabling him to digest it. We know that persons affected with 
madness will often eat and convert into nutriment what persons 
in a sound state of mind could not bear. Sis hair grew like the 
feathers of eagles, and his nails like birds' claws. This was the 
consequence of the continued neglect of his person. No wonder 
then that when this state had passed over him he said that Ids 
figure returned to him ;. for, his figure, that is, his appearance, 
had been sadly altered during that period of his madness and 
neglect of his person. 

It is manifest against the Rationalists that what is termed 
demoniacal possession in the New Testament, cannot be explained 
either as having been the effect of some natural disease which 
got this name, or as having been an unfounded notion in the 
mind of the so-called demoniac, ascribable to the influence of 
imagination on persons of a nervous habit. But, it is quite clear, 
that the persons who in scripture are said to have been possessed 
with devils, were really so possessed. The words of the scripture 
are too precise to leave any room for doubt. Farther, Christ's 
speaking on various occasions to these evil spirits, as distinct 
from the persons possessed by them ; his commanding them, and 
asking them questions, and receiving answers from them, or not 
suffering them to speak ; and several circumstances relating to tht> 
nature of the effects which they had upon the possessed, and to the 
manner of Christ's expelling them — such as their requesting and 
obtaining permission to enter the herd of swine, (Matt., viii, 31, 
32,) and their precipitating these into the sea ; all these can 
never be accounted for by any explanation short of that which 
admits the reality of the demoniacal possession. But we have said 
enough upon a point which is perfectly evident from the words of 
scripture, not to speak of the numberless proofs in confirmation 
of it, which the history of the church at all times furnishes. 

Seventh. — Of Natural History and Pliilosophy. The science of 
natural history has been at all times carefully cultivated in the 
East. The sacred writers of the scripture prove themselves to 
have been well acquainted with it, as the many allusions to it, 
and frequent illustrations drawn from it, evince. Solomon com- 
posed works on the animal and vegetable kingdom, as the sacred 
text informs us. (3rd Kings, v, 13.) 

Philosophy, strictly so called ; that is to say, the science 
which has for its end and object to acquire a knowledge of divine 
and human things by ascending to their first cause, was held in 
great esteem by the ancient Hebrews ; and the sacred pensmeu 
were, of course, extensively acquainted with it. The very first 
chapters of Genesis embrace the principles of the highest philo- 
sophy. Moses shows himself a profound philosopher throughout 

2 F 



434 



ST^TE OF THE SCIENCES, ETC. 



his works : and it is sufficient, moreover, to point to the book of 
Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes to prove to what a 
high degree of perfection this science had arrived among the 
ancient Hebrews. ]S~o doubt, the metaphysics and ethics of the 
scripture have a higher source than the investigations of human 
reason : but we are only speaking here of the acquaintance of the 
sacred pensmen with these departments of knowledge, and this the 
scripture evinces. After the Babylonian captivity many of the 
Jews applied themselves to the study of the Greek philosophy, 
which they endeavoured to accommodate to the Mosaic religion ; 
but this philosophy would not combine either with the teaching 
of Moses or with the sublime doctrine of our Redeemer. It was 
also after the captivity that those numerous synagogues were 
established in which everything regarding the law and the wor- 
ship of the Lord was discussed, where the scripture was read and 
explained, and the people were exhorted and catechised. It is 
true that the teaching in the synagogues being such as we have 
described it was almost entirely of a theological character, yet, 
in the latter times of the Jewish state philosophical questions 
were by no means excluded from the synagogues. And besides 
these synagogues the Jews had also academies or private schools, 
which, in progress of time, were multiplied without limit, both 
by reason of the multitude of doctors, as also on account of the 
difference of opinion among these on a variety of questions. The 
doctors or teachers were anciently styled among the Hebrews, 
D^EDn (hachamim,) which means wise men — the name answers 
to the ootpoi of the Greeks. In the time of our Redeemer they 
received the appellation of sopherim, or scribes, ygafif&arsis. They 
were also accosted by the names rah, rabbi, words, which literally 
signify great, my great, but which, according to the usage of the 
time, conveyed the idea of master, my master. The disciples of 
these masters were called talmidim ; that is to say, those who 
receive learning ; but the doctors themselves assumed, through 
modesty, the title of disciples of the wise men, in imitation of the 
Greek sages, who at first took the title of copoi (wise men), but 
afterwards of <poko6o(j>oi (lovers of wisdom). As often as the 
teaching of these Jewish rabbins turned upon their own views as 
distinct from the inculcation of the contents of the scripture, so 
oiten do they appear to have been anxious to occupy themselves 
principally with the most futile questions — those ridiculous 
minidice with which the Talmuds are replete. At the same 
time, among a multitude of useless things, one will find in these 
writings some subjects treated of which are not devoid of interest. 



\ 

OF THE STATE OF COMMENCE AND NA YIGATION, ETC. 435 



CHAPTER VI. 

OF THE STATE OF COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION AMONG THE 
HEBREWS. 

Eirst. — Commerce, as it has been so often said, is the life and 
support of states, as well as the bond which unites together all 
peoples and all climates. For the purposes of commerce, then, it 
was necessary to establish a communication between the different 
parts of the earth : now this could only be effected by means of 
the art of traversing the seas. Thus, commerce and navigation 
are closely allied to each other. 

Some of the nations by which the Hebrews were surrounded 
were much given to commerce, as the scripture itself sufficiently 
indicates. 

The Phoenicians anciently held the first rank as a commercial 
people. Either by themselves or their agents they purchased 
merchandize throughout the entire East ; this, by means of ships 
on the Mediterranean, they transported to the shores of Africa 
and Europe, bringing back in return money and merchandize, 
which they disposed of in the East. Their metropolis was at 
hi'st Sidon, afterwards Tyre, which was built two hundred and 
forty years before the temple of Solomon, or twelve hundred and 
fifty-one years before Christ. It might be almost said that they 
had emporiums in all the countries of the then known world : 
but among these the most distinguished were Carthage and 
Thartessus or Tharsis in Spain ; from which latter place ships 
which made long voyages were called ships of Tharsis. What 
we have here said is quite in accordance with what the scrip- 
ture states regarding the commerce of the Phoenicians. (See 
Ezech., chapters xxvii and xxviii, and Isai., xxni.) 

The inhabitants of Arabia Eelix also trafficked with India, 
whence they transported the merchandize which they bought, 
in part to Abyssinia and Egypt, in part to Babylon, and, finally, 
in part to Asiongaber, which was the port of the Hebrews on 
the Red Sea. It is by such commerce that we can account lor 
the great riches, which, according to the ancient authors, this 
part of Arabia possessed. 

The commerce of the Egyptians dates only from the reign of 
JNechao the Second, son and successor of Psammiticho. It was 
carried on but feebly until Alexander overturned Tyre, and 
built Alexandria. 



OF THE STATE OF COMMERCE AST) 



It is likely that from the time even of Jacob, commerce was 
not unknown to the Hebrews, for we find it practised by the 
people who surrounded them, such as the Israelites and the 
Madianites. (Gen., xxxvii, 25.) Meanwhile, it is easily con- 
ceived that the nomadic life of the ancient patriarchs was not 
calculated to inspire a taste for commerce ; the care of their 
flocks being the business which almost exclusively occupied them. 
JS'or could the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt lead them to 
this kind of industry, seeing that at that period the Egyptians 
had an extreme aversion for the sea, and that they excluded all 
foreigners from their ports. Although the position of Palestine 
was very favourable to commerce, yet Hoses made no law for the 
purpose of encouraging it. He was not ignorant that the He- 
brew people were destined to preserve the true religion, and, 
therefore, he w ished to guard them, as much as possible, from, 
contact with the idolatrous nations: but he would certainly 
have failed in this end, if, in his legislation, he had shown 
himself anxious to promote commercial transactions with the 
surrounding people. He, therefore, contented himself with re- 
commending to the Hebrews the constant observance of justice 
and goodfaith in buying and selling. (Levit., xix, 56, 37 ; Deut., 
xxv, 13-16.) Eut if Moses did not study to inspire them with a 
love of commerce, neither did he exhibit it to them as a thing 
absolutely unlawful. We see him even in the benedictions 
which he gives the people before his death, announcing that the 
tribes of Zabulon and Issachar shall be enriched by their com- 
merce with the maritime cities which lay near their borders. 
(Deut., xxxiii, 19.) One might even say, that if in the insti- 
tution of the three great annual solemnities which he established, 
he had no formal intention of favouring commerce, he, at least, 
by such an enactment, gave occasion to it: for, since on these 
occasions all the adult males of the Hebrew people were obliged 
to assemble in one place, every one sees what a favourable oppor- 
tunity such an assembly afforded both to buyers and sellers, who, 
no doubt, availed themselves of it ; but, of course, without trench- 
ing upon the due observance of the solemnities. Under the 
Judges the Hebrews kept up commercial relations with the 
Phoenicians, irorn which they derived great advantage. (Judg., 
v, 17.) In the reign of Solomon, commerce attained a great 
height, owing to the exertions of this monarch. After his death 
it disappeared altogether from the Hebrew nation, and for a long 
time ; lor, Josaphat having attempted to re-establish it, failed in 
his enterprise ; the ships which he had put to sea having been 
dashed to pieces against the rocks, at the very port of Asion- 
gaber. (3rd Kings, ix, 26-28 ; xxii, 49, 50 ; 2nd Paralip., ix, 20, 



NAVIGATION AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



437 



21 ; xx, 36, 37.) Nevertheless, before Jerusalem was destroyed 
at the captivity, commerce had made such advances, and had 
rendered that city so famous, that it excited the jealousy of Tyre 
itself. (Ezech., xxvi, 2; xxvii, 17.) During, and after, the cap- 
tivity of Babylon, the Jews beame more and more addicted to 
commerce, and in carrying it on they derived great facilities ; 
first, from the improvements made by Simon Machabeus in the 
port of Joppe on the Mediterranean, and afterwards from the 
magnificent port which Herod the Great constructed at Caesarea. 
(See 1st Mach., xiv, 5 ; Joseph., Antiq., xvi, 9.) 

Of the means of Communication and of the means of Transport- 
ing Goods. — The Phoenicians received a part of the merchandize 
which they bought in India by the way of the Persian Gulf, 
where they had colonies in several islands. Another part came 
to them by land, passing over Arabia, or it was brought by the 
Gulf of Arabia, (the Red Sea,) in which latter case it came by 
sea as far as Asiongaber, whence it was carried by land to Gaza, 
and from Gaza to Phoenicia by the Mediterranean. To these 
imported goods the Phoenicians added the products of their own 
country, and then conveyed all by the Mediterranean to the 
other countries of the world. 

The Egyptians at first contented themselves with allowing 
other nations to bring them the things of which they stoo l in 
need. Thus, they received the merchandize which the Phoe- 
nicians, Arabians, and Abyssinians came to offer them : at a 
later period, however, they also put vessels to sea, and imported 
merchandize from India, which they afterwards conveyed by the 
Mediterranean into other countries. 

Those who made the journey from Palestine to Egypt had a 
choice of two principal routes; one, which conducted in three 
days from Gaza to Pelusium, following the coast of the Medi- 
terranean ; the other went from Gaza to the Elanitic branch of 
the lied Sea. To make the journey by this road required nearly 
a month. 

Although vehicles adapted for the carriage of burthens of a 
certain weight, were anciently known to the Easterns, still it 
does not appear that they made use of them for the transport of 
merchandize. There is not, at least, question of them in the 
ancient authors : and it is certain, besides, that even at this day 
the merchants of the East do not use them. It appears, there- 
fore, that from the earliest times they employed in those coun- 
tries beasts of burthen for the transport of merchandize : the 
load being placed on the back of the animal. Camels were used 
for the long journeys. The Ismaelites and Madianites, to whom 
Joseph was sold, were mounted on camels. (Gen., xxxvii, 25.) 



438 



OF THE ST-LTE OF COMMERCE AXD 



In the circumstances of this history we may trace an image of 
the manner in which commerce is carried on by land to this day 
in the Levant. Several merchants travel together, forming what 
is called a caravan : and it is such an assembly which the scrip- 
ture appears to exhibit to us in the case of these Israelites and 
Madianites, who purchased Joseph. We see also beasts of 
burthen employed in the journey, which the sons of Jacob un- 
dertook when they went to buy corn in Egypt. They made the 
journey by land ; and Moses informs us that asses were employed 
on this occasion. (Gen. xlii, 26 ; xlv, 23.) It is well known 
that in the hot counties this animal is almost as much esteemed 
as the horse and the mule. It is far superior to its fellow in 
our climates. One of the greatest obstacles which those who 
were engaged in land traffic had to overcome was the difficulty 
of finding whereupon to subsist, and where to lodge during the 
journey. It was necessary for the first travellers to bring with 
them provisions for themselves and their beasts. When they 
wished to take some refreshment during the day, they probably 
withdrew to the shade of some trees : at night, for the purposes of 
shelter and repose, they would be likely to avail themselves of some 
cavern, which might be found on their route. Afterwards, thev 
began to carry their tents with them, which they erected on some 
convenient spot, according as it was necessary to make some delay 
on their journey. The scripture furnishes us with examples of 
this practice in the person of Abraham. This patriarch always 
travelled with his tent, (Gen., xii, 8 ; xiii, 18) ; an usage which 
subsists to this day throughout the East. At the same time, 
there were in many places inns for the reception of travellers : 
we see even by the scripture that this sort of establishment 
dates at least as far back as the time of the patriarch Jacob. 
(Gen., xlii, 27.) 

Of Weights and Measures, and Money. Weights and measures 
were regulated at a very early period in Asia. Hoses made 
various enactments concerning them for the Hebrews ; and 
both weights and measures which were to serve as standards and 
models were deposited at first in the Tabernacle, and afterwards 
in the temple, under the cognizance of the priests. On the 
destruction of Solomon's temple these standards necessarily 
perished : and during the captivity the Hebrews used the weights 
and measures of their masters. After the return from captivity 
they in progress of time exchanged the weights and measures of 
their Eastern masters, first, for the weights and measures of the 
Greeks, and afterwards for those of the Romans. The principal 
weight of the Hebrews was the side, in Hebrew bptP {shekel). 
The side was divided into twenty parts called ghera or oboli, as 



NAVIGATION AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



439 



we see in Numbers (xviii, 16,) and in Ezechiel (xlv, 12.) The 
bekah or half-sicle contained ten gheras. Fifty sides — or accord- 
ing to others sixty — or even a hundred, as many suppose maybe 
inferred from two passages of scripture, (3rd Kings, x, 17 com- 
pared with 2nd Paral., ix, 16,) — made one mane, that is to say, 
the /x/i/a, mina : and three thousand sides made one talent — in 
Hebrew *DD (Jdlchar) — as it is easy to conclude from a passage of 
Exodus, (xxxviii, 24, 26.) We subjoin here these Jewish 
weights reduced to English troy weight from a list given by 
Horne : — 

lbs. oz. dwt. gr. 

1. The Ghera, one -twentieth of the Side, 12 

2. The Bekah, half a Side, . .0 5 

3. The Side, . . . 10 

4. The Mane taken as sixty Sides, . 2 6 

5. The Talent, . . . . 125 

A.s to measures, it is certain that among all the people of 
antiquity, such as the Hebrews, Greeks, Romans, and others, the 
measures of length have been always taken from some parts of the 
human body, as is attested by the denominations of palm, cubit, 
pace, foot, &c. At the same time these measures have not re- 
presented the same length in all nations, as the human body had 
not everywhere the same dimensions. 

The five following verses have been constructed for the pur- 
pose of imprinting on the memory the relations of the measures 
of length : — 

Quatuor ex granis dirjitus eomponitur unus. 

Est quater in palmo digitus, quater in pede palmus. 

Quinque pedes passion faciunt. Passus quoque centum. 

Quinque et viginti stadium dant ; sed militate 

Octo dabunt stadia, et duplicatum tibe leucam. 

The measures of length with, the Hebrews were: First, the 
etsbah or digit. It was equal to the breadth of the ringer, or the 
length of four grains of barley. Second, the tefah or palm — 
same as the hoyj^ of the Greeks — was equal to four digits. 
Third, the zereth or span, equal to three palms or twelve digits. 
Fourth, the p aha m or foot, equal to four palms or sixteen digits. 
Fifth, the amma or cubit, equal to six palms or twenty-four digits. 
Some authors call this the common cubit, to distinguish it from 
another, which they call the sacred cubit, and to which they 
allow seven palms or twenty-eight digits. Sixth, the gomed is a 
measure, the value of which is entirely unknown to us. Some 
make it the same with the cubit ; others make it equal to the 



410 



OF THE STATE OF COMMERCE AKD 



whole length of a man's arm. Seventh, the kane or the reed, 
calamus mensurce, was equal to six cubits or one hundred and 
forty-four digits. Eighth, the stadium or furlong, was a Greek 
and Roman measure adopted by the Jews ; we shall see presently 
its value when reduced to English measure. ]N"inth, the mile — 
in Greek (aiXiqv — contained eight furlongs. Horne ascribes ten 
lurlongs to the eastern mile. Tenth, the Sabbath day's journey, 
(Acts i, 12,) according to Glaire, contained about eight furlongs. 
Horne assigns to it only five furlongs. Eleventh, the day's jour- 
ney was a measure of length more or less considerable. Jahn 
assigns to it, as a medium, one hundred and fifty or one hundred 
and sixty furlongs ; Horne gives it two hundred and forty fur- 
longs. We extract from Horne the following scripture measures 
of length reduced to English measure. The short measures are 
here reduced to English feet or inches : — 



1. The Digit equal to, 

2. The Palm, . 

3. The Span, . 

4. The Cubit, 

5. The Kane, or reed of measur 



English Feet. 




1 

10 



Inches. 
0*912 
3-648 

10- 944 
9-888 

11- 328 



The long scripture measures in Horne' s list are reduced to 
English miles, paces^ and feet :— 



1. The Cubit, 

2. The Stadium or Furlong, 

3. The Sabbath journey of five 

furlongs, 

4. The Eastern mile, according to 

Horne, ten furlongs, 



English Miles. 




1 



•5. A Day's journey of 240 furlongs, 33 



Paces. 

' 
145 

729 

403 
172 



Feet. 
1-824 
4-6 

3- 

1-0 

4- 



The measures of capacity used among the Hebrews were : 
First, the bath, a measure for liquids. The bath, according to 
the list given in Horne, was equal to seven gallons and four 
pints English. Second, the epha, which the Septuagint have 
translated by oitpi and ops/, and which was a very ancient 
measure among the Egyptians, had the same capacity as the bath, 
and was used for measuring things dry. Third, met r eta — in 
Greek ^srg^rqs — was of the same capacity as the epha and bath, 
and was used for liquids. Fourth, the omer or hissaron which 
is translated by gomor in our English version, was a measure for 
things dry, and made the tenth part of the epha. It held the 
quantity of manna allowed to each person for his daily- support. 
Fifth, the sea or goltov, which was the third part of the epha, 



NAVIGATION AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



441 



was also used for things dry. Sixth, the hob or xaSoz, a small 
measure for things dry. The kab was the sixth part of the sea, 
and the eighteenth of the eplia. Seventh, the log, a measure for 
liquids, was the fourth part of the cab or kab. Eighth, the 
chomer or kor contained ten ephas : it was used for things dry. 
Ninth, the letech was half of the chomer. Tenth, the nebel was 
equal to three baths. Eleventh, the hin, a sixth part of the 
bath — a measure for liquids. Twelfth, the demi-hin or half of 
the hin. The following list of scripture measures of capacity, 
reduced to English measure, is taken from Horne : and first, the 
measures for liquids are reduced to English wine measure, under 
the heads of gallons and pints : — 

Gallons. Pints. 

1. The Log contained, ... 0,833 



2. The Cab, 

3. The Bin, 

4. The Sea, 

5. The Bath or Epha 

6. The Chomer or Kor 



3,333 

1 2 

2 4 
7 4 

75 5 



Secondly, the measures for things dry are reduced to English 
corn measure under the heads of pecks, gallons, and pints : — 

Pecks. Gals. Pints. 

1. The Cab equal to, ..0 2,8333 

2. The Omer or Gomor, . 5,1 

3. The Sea, . . 1 1 

4. The Epha, ... 303 

5. The Letech, . . 16 

6. The Chomer or Kor, 32 1 

Eesides the scripture measures already explained, there are 
some others mentioned in the Vulgate : these are : First; the 
amphora, (Dan., xiv, 2,) a measure for liquids among the Greeks 
and Romans, equal to the epha. In some places of the Vulgate 
it is used to express an indefinite quantity. The Eoman amphora 
contained two urns, or forty-eight Eoman sextarii : the Attic 
amphora contained three urns, or seventy-two sextarii. Second, 
the^ artaba, (Dan., xiv, 2,) a measure in use among the Baby- 
lonians, contained, according to St. Epiphanius and St. Isidore 
of Seville, seventy-two sextarii. Others attribute a different 
capacity to it. Third, the cadus, (Luke, xvi, 26,) a Eoman 
measure, had the same capacity as the bath, and w r as used for 
measuring liquids. Eourth, the laguncula : this is the word by 
which the Vulgate has rendered, in Isaias (v, 10,) the bath of the 
Hebrew. Eifth, the modius, in the Latin translation, sometimes 
expresses every sort of measure, sometimes answers to the sea, 
and sometimes to the epha. The modius or bushel, a measure 



442 



OF THE STATE OE COMMERCE AND 



for things dry among the Romans, was a third part of the am- 
phora. Sixth, the mensura is a generic term ; it is found, how- 
ever, sometimes employed for the epha. Seventh,^ the sextarius, 
(Levit., xiv, 12,), a Roman measure, ordinarily used for liquids, 
was equal to the log of the Hebrews. 

We come now to say something of the Hebrew money. The 
names by which it was known have been already mentioned when 
we were treating of weights, viz., the ghera, the bekah, the side, 
the mane, the talent : we here subjoin a list from Home, of this 
Hebrew money reduced to the English standard : — 







£ 


s. 


d. 


1. 


The G-hera equal to, 








1,2687 


2. 


The Bekah, 





1 


1,6875 


3. 


The Side, 





2 


3,375 


4. 


The Mane of sixty Sides, 


5 


14 


0,75 


5. 


The Talent, 


342 


3 


9 



The above is the value of the silver money of the He- 
brews. In the list given by Horne, the sicle of gold, (which of 
course was of the same weight as the sicle of silver) was equal 

to, £1 165. 6d. 

The Talent of gold was worth, . . 5,475 
Anciently, among the Hebrews, the value of money 
was determined by weight in every commercial transaction : 
for the use of coin, or stamped money, was comparatively 
recent among this people. It is true that, even in the time 
of Abraham, there is question of the sicle ; and we read in 
Genesis, (xxiii, 16,) that this patriarch, having bought from 
Ephron the field where he wished to bury Sara, his wife, 
paid for it four hundred sides, in good and current money, 
as the text signifies, or in good and current silver. It is 
true, also, that we see Joseph sold to the Ismaelites, 
mginti argenteis, which signifies, according to the Hebrew 
text, for twenty sides of silver, (Gen., xxxvii, 28) ; and 
here we may observe, that very often in the scripture the word 
sicle is understood, and the word silver (in the vulgate 
argenteus) simply is written; as in St. Matthew, (xxvii, 3,) 
where it is said that Judas Iscariot brought back to the chief 
priests the thirty silver pieces (tviginta argenteos,) which 
he had received from them as the price of his treason, that 
is, the thirty sides of silver. But to return : in these pas- 
sages regarding Abraham and Joseph, as well as in many other 
places of the Old Testament, there is not at all question of 
stamped money or coin. In these places there is no intima- 
tion whatever given of the form or figure of these pieces of 
coin or stamped money, if they were such. And, in the original 



NAVIGATION AMONG THE HEBBEWS. 



443 



text of the scripture there is no mention made of stamped 
money until the time of the Machabees, when Antiochus Sidetes 
permitted the high priest, Simon Machabeus, to coin money. In 
the sacred text, before this time, there is only mention made of 
sides, talents, &c. ; names, which simply mark the weight of the 
money, but by no means coin of the mint. Two reasons par- 
ticularly appear to leave no doubt on this matter : first, before 
the time of the Machabees the sides, talents, &c. were weighed 
on the occasion of making any payment. Thus, first, when 
Abraham buys the field of Ephron, they weigh the four hundred 
sides of silver, which is the price of it ; Abraham had the money 
weighed, says Moses. (Gen., xxiii, 16.) Second, the sons of 
Jacob bring back to Joseph their money of the same weight. (Gen., 
xliii, 21.) Third, the ear-ornaments which Eliezer offered to 
Kebecca weighed two sides. (Gen., xxiv, 22.) Fourth, Isaias 
says, in speaking of tbe wicked: " You, who draw gold from 
your purse, who weigh the silver in the balance." (Isai., xlvi, 6.) 
Fifth, the prophet Amos introduces merchants of bad faith as 
saying: "Let us sell with a false measure, and weigh in false 
balances the money that shall be given to us." (viii, 5.) In 
the Hebrew text, indeed, of Genesis, (xxxiii, 19,) and of the 
book of Job, (xlii, 11,) is found the word HtD^tTp (hesita.) which 
the author of the Vulgate, and the Seventy, as well as Onkelos, 
have translated by sheep or Jamh ; from which some interpreters 
•have inferred that kesita was the figure of a sheep stamped on 
money ; others have explained the passages, of real animals. But, 
according to another interpretation this word simply designates 
a certain quantity of silver or money which was estimated by 
weight. And then it will remain to be concluded, from all that 
has been said, that down to the time of the Babylonian captivity 
the Hebrews weighed in sides, talents, &c, the gold and the 
silver with which they paid the price of the goods purchased by 
them ; and that down to this time they had not stamped money 
or coin. Secondly, it is certain that in the time of the captivity 
they did not coin money, but that they used the current coins of 
the Chaldeans. Upon their return from their long captivity they 
formed a nation, which, clown to the epoch of the Machabees, 
was subject, first to the Persians, and afterwards to the Greeks ; 
and during this period the Jews adopted the current money of 
these peoples. But Antiochus Sidetes, King of Syria, one hun- 
dred and thirty-eight years before Christ, permitted Simon, the 
high-priest of the Jews, to issue money of his own coinage in 
Judea. (1st Mach., xv, 6.) Erom this epoch, when the Hebrew 
people was freed from the yoke of foreign nations, Simon had 
money coined ; and his successors continued to use this right of 



OF THE STATE OF COMMERCE AND 



sovereignty down to the time of King Herod, when they began 
to engrave Greek characters on their money. Some of the 
learned in these matters are of opinion that from the year one 
hundred and forty before Christ, that is to say, two years before 
the permission was granted to Simon by Antiochus Sidetes, the 
•Jews had issued money of their own coinage, and that these 
pieces were desigrated by the denomination of sides of Israel, 
whilst the pieces, struck two years later by Simon, bore the name 
of this high-priest ; but others are of opinion that both one and 
the other class of coins was struck by Simon. 

We shall say something now of the money or current coins 
mentioned in the lS T ew Testament ; and the value of each of these 
coins may be discovered by the relation which it bore to the 
Jewish side. Among these we shall give the first place to the 
stater, (Matt., xvii, 26,) which was the principal money of the 
Greeks. It appears from St. Matthew that it weighed four 
drachmas attic, that is, two half-sicles or one whole side of the 
Hebrews, since we see that one stater paid for our Redeemer and 
St. _ Peter that annual tribute, (Matt, xvii, 26,) which was half 
a side for each adult male. Many of these coins are still to be 
seen : they bear upon one side the head of Minerva, and on the 
other the screech-owl — the symbol of the goddess — with her 
monogram. When the Jews began to coin money under Simon 
Machabeus, the high-priest, in the year one hundred and thirty- 
eight before Christ, sides were then issued of the weight of the* 
stater, and these sides were the first pieces coined among the Jews. 
It has been made a question whether or not the Hebrew sides 
which are still to be seen, are authentic ; but at present there is 
no doubt entertained of the authenticity of those which bear 
Samaritan characters. These are the primitive characters of the 
Hebrews — Chanaanites — Phoenicians ; and they were most 
usually employed in Judea, in Samaria, and in Phoenicia, for 
commercial purposes. It is for this reason that sides, marked 
with the modern Hebrew characters, are of a recent date ; 
although among the recent coins there are found some sides 
which are marked with Samaritan characters for the purpose of 
counterfeiting the ancient sides. The figures stamped upon the 
sides are palm-trees, pine-apples — sometimes ears of corn, a 
sheaf of corn, a vine-leaf, a bunch of grapes, a flower, a branch 
of the almond-tree, a vase, which some believe to be the gomor 
in which the manna was preserved ; and others to be one of the 
vessels consecrated to the service of the temple. The legends 
on the sides are various: some have marked upon them, round 
the vase, side of Israel ; and on the other side — the obverse, 
Jerusalem the holy. 



NAVIGATION AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



445 



Second. — The Didrachma, (Matt., xvii, 23,) a weight and 
current coin of the Greeks, which was worth two drachmas attic, 
or one half-stater, or one half-side. Third, the drachma, (Luke, 
xv, 8, 9,) a weight and current coin of the Greeks. It was the 
fourth part of a stater. The drachma of Alexandria was the 
double of the attic drachma. Fourth, the agyvgiov (in the Yulgate 
argenteus — with us, piece of silver — Matt., xxvi, 15,) always 
signifies the side of silver. Fifth, the denarius, (Matt., xviii, 
28,) a silver coin of the Romans, so called because it was equal 
in \alue to ten asses. The denarius was of the same weight as 
the drachma, and, consequently, was equal in value to the fourth 
part of a side. St. Mark, (xii, 15,) and St. Luke, (xx, 24,) give 
the name of denarius (dqvaptov) to the silver piece which each 
Jew paid to the Eomans as capitation tax : the same piece which 
St. Matt., (xxii, 19,) designates by the name of the coin of the 
tribute. The denarius was the daily pay of the soldier among 
the Eomans, according to Tacitus ; as the drachma was of the 
Athenian soldier, according to Thucydides. It was also that 
which was given for their day's wages to the labourers in a vine- 
yard. (Matt., xx. 2, &c.) The ancient denarii present on one 
side the goddess Home, or Victory, and on the obverse a chariot 
with four horses. At a later epoch this coin bore the image of 
Cuesar, as we see by the denarius, which was presented to our 
Saviour. (Matt., xx, 19-21.) Sixth, the assarius was a copper 
coin of the Eomans, equal in value to the half of the as. In the 
Greek text of the New Testament it is written acauoiox. Some 
think that the assarius was but the fourth part of the as : others 
have made the assarius of the same value as the as ; and the 
Vulgate in St. Matt., (x, 29,) lias translated the Greek word by 
as. In St. Luke, (xii, 6,) the Vulgate version translates the 
dvo ccfftfag/a (two assarii) of the Greek text, by dipondium, that 
is, twice the pondo ; because formerly among the Eomans, pondo, 
or pound being the weight of the as, was usud as a name for that 
coin. The assarius had anciently on one side the figure of Janus, 
afterwards that of Ccesar, and on the other side a ship's stern. 
Seventh, the quadrans — written in Greek Tiob^rr^ — (Matt., v, 
26,) a copper coin of the Eomans, which was the fourth part of 
the as. Eighth, the Xs-ttov in the Vulgate minutuin, (a mite,) 
(Luke, xxi, 2,) a copper piece of the Greeks, which was the half 
of 'a quadrans. Hence it is that St. Mark relating how a poor widow 
had thrown dvo l.twra (two mites) into the treasury of the temple, 
adds which is a quadrans, that is, equal in value to the quadrans. 
(Mark, xii, 42.) Ninth, the Atrpa or libra, (the pound.) The 
money thus called of course varied in value, according as it was 
of silver or gold. The libra (or pound) had not the same weight 



446 



OF THE STATE OF COMMERCE AXD 



in all countries : but most commonly merchandize was sold ac- 
cording to the libra of the country from which it came. As to 
the libra of which mention is made in the scripture, it appears 
to have been that of Rome, which was of twelve ounces. Besides 
the kinds of money of which we have now spoken, and the names 
of which are met with in the original text of scripture, there are 
some others, of which the names are found only in the Yulgate. 
These are : First, the agnus, or ovis, the lamb or the sheep, (Gen., 
xxxiii, 19 ; Job, xlii, 11,) which, according to Glaire, was a 
weight, or a piece of metal, not stamped as coin, and the value 
of which is unknown to us : the text has Icesita. Second, the 
obolus, (Exod, xxx, 13,) which Avas worth the twentieth part 
of the side, and equal to the ghera. Third, the solidus, 1st 
Esdras, ii, 69; viii, 27,) which was a gold coin of the Romans, 
equal in weight to two drachmas attic, or to the Hebrew half- 
sicie of gold. 

In speaking of the preceding kinds of money or coins, we 
have, in almost every instance, mentioned the relation which 
they bore to the side of the Jews ; hence, it is unnecessary to 
subjoin here any detailed statement of the value in English 
money of the Roman money mentioned in the New Testament, 
seeing that we have already stated the value of the Hebrew side 
in English money. The only case in which we have not men- 
tioned the relation to the side, is that of the Roman pound, i.e. 
the libra, or mina Romana; (in the Vulgate of the New Testa- 
ment mna, from the Greek) ; but, according to Glaire, the rela- 
tion is easily traced here also ; thus, the Eoman pound contained 
twelve ounces — each ounce contained eight drachmas attic : now, 
four drachmas attic were equal to the Hebrew side. Observe, 
in conclusion, that the denarius is called by English writers the 
Roman penny ; and hence, in our Ehemish translation of the 
New Testament, we find the word so often rendered penny simply 
and sine add it o. 

Of Navigation. — In treating of commerce, we have spoken 
of navigation as a means of transport for merchandize ; here we 
shall consider it as an art, and say a few words of its history and 
progress among the ancient orientals. 

We cannot determine the time when this art had its begin- 
ning. Alany events might have given rise to it, but the 
complete want of historical documents leaves us altogether to 
conjectures on this point. As the Phoenicians were so much 
addicted to commerce it will be easily admitted that this people 
must have soon perceived the great advantages which the sea 
might be made to afford them in carrying out their object; and 
so they have been regarded by antiquity as the inventors of 



NAVIGATION" AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



447 



navigation. Although we know not the manner in which the 
Phoenicians conducted their navigation in the first ages, and 
although we are ignorant as to their first discoveries and their 
alter progress in seafaring knowledge, it is yet certain that they 
could not have undertaken sea voyages so long and so difficult 
as those which all antiquity attributes to them, if they had not 
been, even in a high degree, masters of the art of navigation. 
Hence, it appears beyond dispute that these people were the first 
to know the advantage and utility which might be drawn from 
the observation of the stars in directing the route of the ship ; 
their progress in the arts and sciences warrants the belief that 
they were also the first to avail themselves of oars, of sails, and 
of a rudder. The Egyptians could not have made for a long 
time any discovery in navigation, since they had for centuries 
an extreme aversion for the sea, so much so, that they looked 
upon it as an impiety to dare to embark upon it. Add to that, 
that Egypt does not produce the timber fit for the construction 
of ships, that it had but a few good ports upon its coasts, and 
that the policy of its ancient sovereigns was entirely opposed to 
maritime commerce. It was Sesostris who was the first to de- 
part from the principles of all the kings, his predecessors. 
Having proposed to himself the conquest of the whole world, he 
caused to be fitted out a fleet of four hundred sail, if we are to 
believe Diodorus Siculus, (Lib., i, § 53, et sequent.,) by means 
of which he made himself master of a great part of the maritime 
provinces and of the sea coasts of India. But the naval glory 
of the Egyptians did not last longer than the reign of Sesostris 
himself ; for we do not see that any of his successors entered into 
his views, or continued his projects. As to what regards the 
Hebrews, seeing that their principal commerce was always car- 
ried on by land, it is not to be presumed that they made very 
great progress in navigation, except in Solomon's reign ; and 
thus we find that there is very little mention made of ships in 
the inspired writers who preceded the time at which that prince 
lived. 

Of the ancient Shipping. — Eegarding the size of the Jewish 
ships and their peculiar fitness for the purposes of navigation, we 
have not sufficient information to be able to speak precisely. 
This much, however, we can say, that the trading vessels of the 
ancients were, in general, much inferior in size to those of the 
moderns : and that from the description of St. Paul's voyage to 
Rome, which we have in the Acts of the Apostles, (xxvii,) it is 
manifest, that even in the Apostle's time the art of navigation 
had not attained to any very high degree of improvement. The 
first mention which we find in the bible of a ship is in the pro- 



448 



OF THE DKESS OF THE HEBBEWS. 



photic address which the patriarch Jacob makes to his children 
assembled around his deathbed. (Gen., xlix, 13.) Isaias speaks 
to us of masts, of sails, of cordage, and of oars. (Isai., xviii, 2; 
xxx, 17 ; xxxiii, 21-23.) Ezechiel also mentions all these parts 
of a ship, (xxvii, 7, 8.) The scripture speaks of trading vessels 
as of a distinct class. (Proverbs, xxxi, 14.) AYhen these were 
such as made long voyages, they are termed in scripture ships o f 
Thar sis, (Isai., xxiii, 1 ; 2nd ParaL, ix, 21, &c.,) which place is 
understood to have been a city of Spain, called by another name, 
Tartessus. In the second book of the Machabees, (xii, iii, 3-6,) 
cx,a(pr f , scapha occurs, a word which, in the Acts of the Apostles, 
evidently signifies a skiff or small boat attached to the ship, 
(Acts, xxvii, 16-80-32,) but which, in this passage of the Macha- 
bees might well designate a small bark of any kind. In the 
]N~ew Testament, that is, in the Acts of the Apostles, (xxvii,) we 
have a particularly detailed notice of the several parts of a ship, 
as well as of the means which were then available for contending 
with a storm at sea. 



CHAPTEE VII. 

OF THE DKESS OP THE HEBBEWS. 

Fiest. — Of the matter of the Jewish Garments. The first gar- 
ments of man were broad girdles, or rather aprons, made of the 
large leaves of the fig tree. But these soon gave way to a more 
convenient dress ; God himself having soon given to our first 
parents garments of skin for their covering. (Gen., iii, 7-21.) 
And thus, although many nations afterwards used, for the pur- 
pose of dress, the bark of trees, leaves, or bullrushes knotted 
together; yet, the skins of animals appears to have been the 
matter universally employed in the early times. But it is to be 
observed, that these skins were used without any preparation — 
simply in the state in which they came from the bodies of the 
animals. Such was the way in which the ancients clothed them- 
selves, until the use of flax, of wool, and of cotton was intro- 
duced. It has been a tradition among the Jews, that ^soema, 
the sister of Tubalcain, who lived before the deluge, discovered 
the mode of spinning these substances, and of forming them iuto 
the web or cloth. Whatever may be thought of this opinion, 
the art of weaving is of high antiquity. In the very ancient 
book of Job mention is made of the web of the weaver. (Job., 
vii, 6 ) 

From the very early times weaving was extensively practised 



OF THE DRESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



449 



in Egypt, and flax was one of the most important crops of that 
country. In the history of the plagues of Egypt we read that 
the hail hurt the flax-crop which was then in blossom. (Exod., 
ix, 31.) Among the calamities that were to befal Egypt the 
prophet Isaias mentions, that the weavers should be distressed 
on account of the failing crop of the flax. (Isaias, xix, 9.) That 
flax was cultivated in Palestine, when the Israelites took pos- 
session of the country, appears from what is related in Josue, 
(ii, 6,) viz., that Rahab hid the spies on the top of her house, 
covering them with the stalks of the flax which was there. The 
flax stalks had been spread on the flat roof in the open air, in 
order to roast them in the sun. 

The word which the Yulgate renders bi/ssus, (after the Sep- 
tuagint), and which in the Hebrew is designated by WW(shesh,) 
and (buts,) occurs frequently in the Pentateuch, and is 
understood by many to signify cotton. In our English version 
it is rendered fine linen. We may suppose, however, that cotton 
was used as a material for garments among the ancient Hebrews, 
since the shrub, from whose fruit it is obtained, grows in many 
parts of Egypt and of Palestine. This shrub reaches the height 
of about three feet, and spreads in branches : it produces a green 
nut attaining the size of a walnut, in which the cotton is con- 
tained. At the sametime, the matter of garments has been from 
the time of Moses chiefly flax and wool : only the mixture of 
these two substances in the same cloth w r as prohibited by the 
law. (Levit., xix, 19; Deut., xxii, 11.) But furs and skins 
did not cease to be still employed for clothing, as several pas- 
sages of Leviticus, (xi, 32 ; xiii, 48 ; xv, 17,) and of the book 
of Numbers, (xxxi, 20.) appear to show. This was the ordinary 
dress of the prophets, (4th Kings, i, 8; Hebr., xi, 37); and 
many among the people of the East use it commonly to this day. 
As for silk, it was not known among the Hebrews until a late 
period ; Ezechiel is at least the first of the sacred writers who 
has spoken of it, (xvi, 10, 13,) under the name of (meshi) : St. 
John in the Apocalypse ranks it amongst the most precious stuffs. 

Second. — Of the Colour of their Dress.- — The colours which 
were most in use were white and purple. White garments were 
usually worn on festivals, and they were looked upon as an 
emblem of joy, in opposition to a black dress, which they only 
put on in times of mourning and sadness. As to purple, the 
ancients had so great an esteem for this colour, that in the begin- 
ning it was reserved specially for kings and princes ; and conse- 
crated to the service of the deity. The scripture informs us that 
Moses employed many stuffs of this colour for the works of the 
Tabernacle, and for the garments of the High Priest ; and the 

2 Or 



4<50 



OF IKE DRESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



same scripture informs us, that the Babylonians put a purple 
dress upon their idols. If in after times this colour got into more 
common use, it nevertheless continued always to be held in the 
highest esteem. The purple is called in Hebrew argaman, from 
the name of the shellfish from which the purple die is procured. 
Two other colours, most highly esteemed by the ancients, and 
which they employed for the same uses as the purple, were the 
scarlet, anciently called in Hebrew iolahath or tolahath sham, 
and at a later period larmil, and the deep blue or techeleth. The 
custom of giving different or various colours to the same piece of 
stuff is very ancient, and is referred to by Moses. There were 
several ways of effecting this : either by means of the needle to 
introduce upon the web of one colour threads of different dyes ; 
or, in the very weaving of the web to make use of the various- 
coloured threads : another mode would be to dye the web with 
the various colours. We find, that in the more early ages, gar- 
ments of various colours were in great esteem : such was the 
robe of Joseph. (Gen., xxxvii, 23.) 

Third.— Of the Tunic. The kethoneth, (rOTD) usually 
rendered in Greek by the word ^iroov that is, tunic, was the dress 
of man from the earliest time. It was for a long time the only 
habit worn, and was used both by men and women : and at a 
later period it was still the principal garment. In the beginning 
it must have been very simple in its form. However, it appears 
that as early as the time of Moses it assumed the shape which 
it ever after retained among the Hebrews. It was a kind of 
frock furnished with sleeves, and covering the body down to the 
ankles. The tunics of the women nearly resembled those of the 
men, and only differed in being longer and more ornamented. 
Both were ornamented, more or less, with a kind of lace-work 
round the lower part of the garment. Calmet says that the 
tunics of the Hebrews were often without seam, being made 
upon the loom. Such were the tunics of the priests, and of our 
Lord. {See the Commentary of Calmet on Exod., xxviii, 4, 40 ; 
and on St. John, xix, 23.) Sometimes two tunics were worn, 
particularly in cold weather ; and on a journey the traveller 
usually took a second with him, which he kept in reserve for a 
change of dress. It is for this reason that our Eedeemer, to 
teach His apostles to place their reliance upon His providence, 
prohibits them to carry two tunics. (Matt., x, 10.) The charac- 
ter of the Jewish dress may be illustrated by a reference to the 
Arab tribes — a people that have preserved ancient manners and 
customs so faithfully. In several particulars, both as regards 
dress and manners, they exhibit to us the scriptural modeL In 
referring to them we shall avail ourselves of Shaw's well known 



OF THE DKESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



451 



book, Travels in Barbary and the Levant. The intelligent author 
here describes the Bedouin Arabs of Northern Africa ; and also 
the Kabyles, an indigenous people of the same country, who lead 
a kind of life like that of the Bedouins, but who commonly inhabit 
the mountains, whilst the latter chiefly occupy the plains. In 
order to understand better the following quotations from Shaw, 
observe, that when a Jew was dressed he had on, over the tunic, 
one or more garments — the to iftatiov or ra ////ar/a of the New 
Testament. This upper garment of the Jews answered to the 
hyke of the Kabyles and Arabs as described by Shaw : or, the 
Jewish upper garments, (when there was a second of them,) 
answered to the hyke and burnoose of Shaw. Now, in illustra- 
tion of the tunic, Shaw has the following : — 

" Under the hyke some wear a close-bodied frock or tunic 
(a jillebba they call it,) with or without sleeves, which differs' 
little from the Roman tunica, or habit in which the constellation 
Bootes is usually painted. The -£itm or coat of our Saviour, 
which was woven without seam from the top throughout, (John, 
xix, 23,) might be of the like fashion. This too, no less than 
the hyke, is to be girded about their bodies, especially when 
they are engaged in any labour, exercise, or employment ; at 
which times they usually throw off their burnooses and hykes, 
and remain only in these tunics. And of this kind probably was 
the habit wherewith our Saviour was still clothed, when He is 
said to lay aside His garments, i/iariu pallium scil. et peplum or 
burnoose and hyke, (John, xiii, 4,) and to take a towel and gird 
Himself .... This kind of tunic it is also, which St. Peter at the 
command of the angel, (Acts, xii, 8,) might have girded upon 
him before he is enjoined to cast his garment (i/jloctiov) about 
him. Now the hyke, or burnoose, or both, being probably at 
that time ^i^ariov or /,a«7/a) the proper dress, clothing or habit or 
the Eastern nations, as they still continue to be of the Kabyles 
and Arabs, when they laid them aside, or appeared without one 
or the other, they might very probably be said to be undressed, or 
naked, according to the Eastern manner of expression." (Shaw's 
Travels in Barbary and the Levant, third edition, vol. 1, pp. 408, 
409.) The micknasim, or drawers, were not in use among the 
ancient Hebrews, although they are very common at this day in 
the East, being used by both men and women. Linen drawers 
was a part of the dress which Moses was commanded by God to 
make for the priests, to be worn by them when they officiated at 
the altar. (Exod., xxviii, 42.) 

Fourth. — Of the Girdle and the Scarf. When engaged in 
any employment or upon a journey, the Hebrews were ac- 
eustomed to gird the tunic round the body. The girdles were 



452 



OF THE DEFSS OE THE HEBREWS. 



more or less costly, according to the rank of the person. Those 
of the great, the rich, and particularly those used by women of 
high rank, were precious and magnificent. The men carried 
the sword at the girdle, and hence its place was between the 
girdle and the tunic. (2nd Kings, xx, 8-10.) Among the occu- 
pations of the valiant woman, of whom the scripture speaks, we 
may remark that one, of making precious girdles, which she 
sold to the Chananeans. (Prov. xxxi, 24.) The matter of these 
girdles was linen, which was ornamented with gold embroidery, 
and with fringes. Isaias, reproaching the daughters of Sion 
with their luxury in dress, declares to them, on the part of the 
Lord, that their rich girdles shall be replaced by a simple cord. 
(Isai., iii, 24.) The example of Elias and of St. John the Bap- 
tist appears to prove, that the prophets and poor persons wore 
leathern girdles. (4th Kings, i, 8 ; Matt., iii, 4.) The Hebrews 
often carried their money in the girdle, which thus served them 
as a purse, (Matt., x, 9) ; and it was also at the girdle that they 
carried their ink-horn, as we learn from the passage where 
Ezechiel speaks of a man " who had a writer's ink-horn at his 
reins." (Ezech., ix, 2.) This custom of wearing a girdle at the 
reins, and the different uses which were made of it by the He- 
brews, are confirmed by the usages of the Easterns of the present 
day. Thus, Shaw, speaking still of the Kabyles and Arabs, says, 
" Their girdles are usually of worsted ; very artfully woven into 
a variety of figures. They are made to fold several times about 
the body ; one end of which being doubled back and sewn along 
the edges, serves them for a purse, agreeable to the acceptation 
of the in the scriptures. (Matt., x, 9; Mark, vi, 8.) The 
Turks make a further use of these girdles by fixing therein their 
knives and poinards, whilst the hojias, i.e. the writers and secre- 
taries , suspend in the same their ink-horns." (Shaw's Travels, 
third edition, vol. 1, pages 409, 410.) Besides such girdles as we 
have now described, known among the Hebrews by the names of 
ezor and chagora, the women used yet another kind of girdle, 
which Calmet thinks might have been the same as what the 
Romans called redimiculum, or sueeinetorium — such as is seenin the 
pictures of Isis ; that is to say, a ribbon or a kind of scarf, which, 
being adjusted behind the neck, is brought over the shoulders, 
then crossed in front under the breast, and the ends meeting and 
united behind, thus forms a girdle, which supports a petticoat 
that reaches down to the feet. 

Fifth. — Of the Upper Garments. Among the garments 
which the Hebrews put over the tunic, the principal ones were 
the ephod, the meil, and the simla. Eirst, the ephod was a sacred 
habit, which made a part of the priestly garments. If it was 



OF THE DRESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



453 



sometimes permitted to laics to wear it, it was only to the most 
distinguished persons, and exclusively in religious ceremonies. 
We have spoken already of its form when treating of the orna- 
ments of the priests. Second, the meil was a kind of robe with- 
out sleeves, which came down to the heels, or, at least, below 
the knee. The High Priest wore a meil immediately under the 
ephod. The meil of the High Priest was entirely blue. Third, 
the simla, which was called sometimes also beged, in Greek 
/^ar/of, was a kind of cloak. Now, the cloak which the 
Hebrews ordinarily wore over their tunic was of a square form, 
as is inferred from a passage of Deuteronomy, (xxii, 12.) How- 
ever, different interpreters have conceived different ideas of this 
square form of the Jewish cloak. Some suppose that it was 
simply a piece of cloth, square or oblong, without an opening, 
without seam, and without sleeves, which was thrown upon the 
shoulders, and adjusted about the body in various ways — some- 
times in one way, and sometimes in another. Others suppose 
that it was a square-cornered oblong piece of cloth, with a hole 
in the middle of its length to admit the head to pass through ; 
and thus, when put on, it fell, one half in front of the person, 
and the other half behind. It would appear that the Jews 
ordinarily wore but one garment over the tunic, in which case 
that upper garment, most probably, bore a close resemblance to 
the hyke of the Kabyles and Arabs, as described by Shaw, who 
says, " The principal manufacture of the Kabyles and Arabs is 
the making of hykes, or blankets, as we should call them. The 
women alone are employed in this work, (as Andromache and 
Penelope were of old, ) who do not use the shuttle, but conduct 
every thread of the woof with their fingers. These hykes are 
of different sizes, and of different qualities and fineness. 
The usual size of them is six yards long, and five or six feet 
broad, serving the Kabyle and Arab for a complete dress in 
the day, and as they sleep in their raiment, as the Israelites 
did of old, (Deut., xxiv, 13,) it serves, likewise, for his bed 
and covering by night. It is a loose, but troublesome gar- 
ment, being frequently disconcerted, and falling upon the 
ground ; so that the person who wears it is every moment 
obliged to tuck it up, and fold it anew about his body. This 
shows the great use there is of a girdle whenever they are con- 
cerned in any active employment ; and in consequence thereof, 
the force of the scripture injunction, alluding thereto, of 
having our loins girded, in order to set about it. The method of 
wearing these garments, with the use they are at other times 
put to in serving for coverlids for their beds, should induce us to 
take the finer sorts of them, at least, such of them as are worn 



454 



OF THE DRESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



by the ladies and persons of distinction, to be the peplus of the 
ancients. Ruth's veil, "which held six measures of barley, (Ruth, 
iii, 15, J might be of the like fashion, and have served extra- 
ordinarily for the same purpose. 

& ' * x ^ # ss- * a- 

* * * It is very probable, likewise, that 

the loose-folding garment, the toga of the Romans, was of this 
kind. For, if the drapery of their statues is to instruct us, this 
is actually no other than the dress of the Arabs when they appear 
in their hykes. The plaid of the Highlanders in Scotland is the 
very same. Instead of the fibula that was used by the Romans, 
the Arabs join together with thread, or with a wooden bodkin, 
the two upper corners of their garment ; and after having placed 
them first over one of their shoulders, they then fold the rest of 
it about their bodies." (Shaw's Travels in Barhary and the 
Levant, vol. 1, pages 403, 406.) 

As the Jews sometimes wore more than one upper garment 
they may, in that case, have resembled the Kabyles and Arabs 
in hyke and burnoose. On this latter garment Shaw has the 
the following : — " The burnoose, which answers to our cloak, is 
often for warmth worn over these hykes. This, too, is another 
great branch of their woollen manufactory. It is wove in one 
piece, and shaped exactly like the garment of the little god, 
Telesphorus ; viz., strait about the neck, with a cape or Hippo- 
crates' sleeve for a cover to the head, and wide below like a 
cloak. Some of them, likewise, are fringed round the bottom, 
like Parthenaspa's and Trajan's garment upon the basso relievos 
of Constantine's arch. The burnoose without the cape seems to 
answer to the Roman pallium ; and with it to the bardocucullus." 
(Shaw, vol. i, page 406.) The Sale was a sort of haircloth of 
a black or brown colour, and made of camel's or goat's hair : it 
was only worn in penitential times, and times of mourning. The 
poorest class only used it as an ordinary dress. The scripture 
speaks besides of garments of widowhood, as worn by widows. 
Mention is made of them in the history of Thamar, of Judith, 
and of the woman who was sent by Joab to intercede with David 
in favour of Absalom. (Gen., xxxviii, 19 ; Judith, x, 2 ; 2nd 
Kings, xiv, 2.) In the book of Judith we find a distinction 
made between sackcloth or haircloth, which was worn in times 
of mourning, and the garments of widowhood. Thus we read 
regarding Judith — " And she called her maid, and going into 
her house she took off her haircloth, and put away the garments 
of her widowhood." (Judith, x, 2.) 

Sixth. — Of the Head-dress. We may easily suppose that the 
first article in the way of head-dress, if it may be so called, 



OF THE DRESS OE THE HEBKEWS. 



455 



which the Hebrews used, was a kind of cord or fillet, with which 
they bound the hair to prevent it from incommoding them. 
The usage of binding the hair in this way is still practised by 
many in the East. By degrees was introduced among the 
Hebrews, as among the other Easterns, the custom of folding a 
piece of linen round the head. It does not appear that such 
head-dresses as the hat and bonnet among us were ever used by 
the ancient Jews. On this subject, also, Shaw's observations 
among a people so retentive of ancient customs as are the Arabs 
and Kabyles, will not be unacceptable. He says then — " If we 
except the cape of the burnoose, which is only occasionally used 
during a shower of rain, or in very cold weather, several Arabs 
and Kabyles go bareheaded all the year long, as Massinissa did 
of old, (Cicero, de Senectute,) binding their temples only with a 
narrow fillet to prevent their locks from being troublesome. As 
the ancient diadema might originally serve for this purpose, so 
it appears from busts and medals to have been of no other 
fashion. Eut the Moors and Turks, with some of the principal 
Arabs, wear upon the crown of the head a small hemispherical 
cap of scarlet cloth, another great branch of their woollen manu- 
factory. The turban, as they call a long narrow web of linen, 
silk, or muslin, is folded round the bottom of these caps, and 
very properly distinguishes, by the number and fashion of the 
folds, the several orders and degrees of soldiers, and sometimes 
of citizens, one from another. We find the same dress and 
ornament of the head, the tiara, as it was called, upon a number 
of medals, statues, and basso relievos of the ancients." (Shaw, 
vol i, page 407.) As to the Jewish head-dress, we must observe 
here that the mitznepheth (r/a^a, or mitre, of the High Priest) did 
not differ much in its form from the tsanif, the tiara or mitre of 
both men and women. The mitre of the High Priest was distin- 
guished by the diadem or plate of gold which was bound to it 
in front. As to the head-dress of the women, no small part of it 
was the hair itself, which we may suppose that the Hebrew 
women, like those of Greece and Rome, wore long. We find 
St. Paul, indeed, saying, that "if a woman nourish her hair it 
is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering" (1st 
Corinth., xi, 15.) Besides the natural covering of the hair, and 
the veil, of which we shall speak presentlv, the women also 
wore, as well as the men, the tsanif or mitre. Among the orna- 
ments of dress which Judith put on we find the mitra mentioned 
in the Yulgate, (Judith, x, 3,) which word our Bouay version 
has translated bonnet. As we have before intimated, the best 
means which we now have of conveying an idea of its form, 
is by comparing it to the mitre of the priest, (described in an 



456 



OF THE DRESS OP THE HEBREWS, 



earlier part of this volume,) to which it is supposed to have closely 
approximated in shape. It was made of fine linen, and no doubt 
may have been sometimes composed of richly embroidered linen. 
For, upon this whole matter of head-dress, the women often ex- 
pended a great deal of care, as the allusions in the New Testa- 
ment prove. The observations of Shaw, so often referred to, 
will here also throw light upon our subject. Speaking of the 
Moorish ladies, he says, "They all affect to have their hair 
hang down to the ground, which after they have collected into 
one lock, they bind and plait it with ribbands." (See 1st Epist. 
of St. Peter, iii, 3 ; and 1st Epist, of St Paul to Timothy, ii, 9, 
in both which places this extravagant ornamenting of the hair is 
condemned.) " Where nature has been less liberal in this orna- 
ment, there the defect is supplied by art, and foreign hair is 
procured to be interwoven with the natural. After the hair is 
thus plaited they proceed to dress their heads by tying, above the 
lock I have described, a triangular piece of linen, adorned with 
various figures in needlework. This, among persons of better 
fashion, is covered with a sarmah, as they call it, which is made 
in the same triangular shape, of thin flexible plates of gold or 
silver, artfully cut through and engraven in imitation of lace. 
A handkerchief of crape, gauze, silk, or painted linen, bound 
close over the sarmah, and falling afterwards carelessly upon the 
favourite lock of hair, completes the head-dress of the Moorish 
ladies." (Shaw, vol. 1, p. 412.) The Jewish and Grecian ladies 
never appeared in public without a veil. Hence, St. Paul 
severely censures the Corinthian women for appearing in the 
church without a veil. (1st Corinth., xi, 34.) In Hebrew there 
are three different terms to signify a veil — an ornament exclu- 
sively reserved to women ; these words are — tsamma, rehala and 
tsahif. "We may suppose that these veils were not all of the 
same kind ; just as at present in Asia the women's veils are of 
different kinds. The ancient Hebrew veil was sometimes large 
enough to cover the whole body ; in proof of which, see Isaias, 
(iii, 2, 22; Ruth., iii, 15; Gen., xxxviii, 14.) Such a veil 
might be well compared to the peplm, or robe anciently worn by 
the Grecian and Eoman ladies. On the subject of veils Shaw 
says, speaking of the same persons as in the preceding quota- 
tion : " When these ladies appear in public they always fold 
themselves up so closely in their hykes, that even without their 
veils we could discover very little of their faces. But in the 
summer months, when they retire to their country seats, they 
walk abroad with less caution ; though, even then, upon the 
approach of a stranger they always drop their veils, as Rebecca 
did upon the sight of Isaac." (Shaw — ubi supra.) 



OF THE DBESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



457 



Seventh. — Of the mode of dressing the hair ; of the heard, and 
some ornaments of the face. Long hair was in great esteem 
among the Jews. We have already spoken of the care with 
which the women nourished the hair ; but the men also, among 
the Hebrews, as was the general custom of the East, wore the 
hair long : it was only when it became troublesome by its length, 
that they cut it. At the sametime, we learn from St Paul, (1st 
Cor., xi, 14,) that to take such pains in nourishing the hair as 
the women took, would have been considered a mark of effemi- 
nacy in a man. Baldness was, in the eyes of the Jews, one of 
the most shameful deformities, and the appellation of bald-head 
was one of the most contumelious expressions which could be 
addressed to any one. (4th Kings, ii, 23.) In conformity with 
these notions, we find that the hair of certain criminals was cut, 
by way of inflicting an ignominious punishment upon them. 
Nehemias informs us, that he cut off the hair of those Jews who 
had taken to themselves wives from the Philistine city of Azotus. 
(2nd Esd., xiii, 25.) In Isaias, (iii, 17,) God, to punish the 
daughters of Sion for the excessive pains which they took in 
curling the hair and adorning the head, threatens them with 
baldness. Among the Hebrews, men as well as women were 
accustomed to anoint the hair, using for this purpose, when they 
could procure it, richly perfumed or scented oil. 

The Jews wore their beards long. The beard among them, 
as is still the case in the East, was considered a great ornament 
to a man. To cause the beard of another to be shaven or other- 
wise ill-treated, was the greatest insult. (1st Paral., xix, 3, 5 ; 
2nd Kings, x, 4, 10.) Hence, by a figure of speech, the beard 
was used to designate the illustrious men of any nation, and the 
shaving of the beard to indicate slavery. (Isaias, vii, 10 ; Jerem., 
xlviii, 45.) The Hebrews were forbidden to shave those angles 
of the beard where it meets the hair of the head, (Levit., xix, 
27,) because a certain race of the Arabs abused this practice to 
idolatrous purposes. To pluck out or cut one's beard was a mark 
of deep mourning, in which it was usual to lay aside all orna- 
ment ; but to pluck out another's beard was the most grievous 
insult. (Isai., 1, 6.) 

The scripture sometimes reproaches the women of Israel with 
painting the face and blackening the eyes. The practice to which 
the scripture alludes when it speaks of blackening the eyes, is 
most happily illustrated by the observations of travellers in the 
East, and here again we shall quote from Shaw. Where he is 
speaking of the same persons referred to in the last quotation 
which we have made from him, he says, " But none of these 
ladies think themselves completely dressed till they have tinged 



458 



OF THE DEES* OF THE HEBREWS. 



their eyelids with alkahol, i.e. the powder of lead ore. And as 
this is performed by first dipping into this powder a small wooden 
bodkin of the thickness of a quill, and then drawing it after- 
wards through the eyelids, over the ball of the eye, we hare a 
lively image of what the prophet, (Jereni., iv, 30,) may be sup- 
posed to mean by tikrehi happuk henayik.* The sooty colour 
which is thus communicated to the eyes is thought to add a 
wonderful gracefulness to persons of all complexions. The prac- 
tice of it. no doubt, is of the greatest antiquity ; for, besides the 
instance already taken notice of, we find that when Jezebel is 
said (2nd Kings; in Vulgate 4th Kings, ix. 30.) to have painted 
her face, the original literally means that she set off (or adorned 
her eyes withpouk or lead ore. Koran happuk, i.e. the horn of poulc 
or lead ore. the name of Job's youngest daughter, was relative to 
this custom and practice." (Shaw, vol. 1, uii supra.) In the 
Vulgate the name of Job's daughter here referred to, is rendered 
Cornustibii. Stibium being the Latin name for antimony, or the 
stibic-stone. as the Hebrew word |19 (puk) is translated in our 
Louay version. 

Eighth. — Of the Dress of the Legs and Feet. Stockings were 
not in use among the Jews. On the feet they wore sandals or 
soles, tied in various manners around the foot. These sandals or 
soles they put off when going to a banquet, entering a sacred 
place, and in times of mourning. Among the J ews, when a guest 
arrived he was conducted into a room, where the servants untied 
his sandals, and washed his feet from the defilement of mire and 
dust. This office was usually performed by the lowest servants. 
This wellknown custom illustrates the words of the Baptist 
speaking of Christ, when he tells us that he is not worthy to 
unloose the 1 at diet of His shoe — or to carry Sis shoes. (Hark, i, 7 ; 
Matt., iii, 11.) It also shows us more clearly to what a degree 
of humiliation our Divine Kedeemer submitted for our example, 
when He washed His disciples' feet at the Last Supper. (See 
John, xiii.) In those hot Eastern countries, the poor traveller, 
whose feet had been so badly protected by the sandals from the 
dust and gravel of the way, was much refreshed by having them 
washed at the end of his journey. Hence, we find that among 
the distinguished good works by which St. Paul requires that 
the widow, who was to receive her support from the alms of the 
church, should be recommended, is placed that one: " if she 
have washed the feet of the saints" that is, of the poor christian 
strangers. (1st Timothy, v, 10.) As to the material which the 

* »jnpP "y£2 -yry our Douay version here has "paintest thy eyes with 
stibic-stone." 



OF THE "DKESS OF THE HEBREWS. 



459 



Hebrews- used in making their sandals, Calmet says, that not 
alone of leather were these sandals made, but that sometimes 
they were made of wood, of linen, or of other materials, accord- 
ing as it suited the circumstances or convenience of persons. 

Mnth. — Of Several other Ornaments, First, among the 
ancients, persons of distinction carried a staff made in a particular 
manner. It was a kind of sceptre, which in latter times was 
reserved exclusively to kings and sovereign princes. At first, 
however, its use was much more general ; for the fathers of 
families, judges, and in general all persons elevated above others 
by rank and position, carried this staff or sceptre. That the 
custom prevailed among the Hebrews is proved by Genesis (xxviii, 
18.) Second, seals or signets were commonly worn by both 
sexes. The seal was carried on the bosom, suspended from the 
neck by means of a chain or ligature. (Gen., xxiii, 18; Cant., 
viii, 6; Agg., ii, 24.) On the seal the name merely of the 
possessor, and perhaps sometimes, as is the custom at present in 
Asia, some short sentence was engraven. When the seal was 
dipt in ink, its impress upon any document held the place of a 
subscription. It was used for several other purposes. The seal 
was often attached to a ring : by the delivery of such a ring 
kiugs created the chief prefects of their kingdoms. (Gen xli, 43 ; 
Esth,, iii, 10, 12; viii, 2; Jerem., xxii, 24; Dan., vi, 10; xiii, 
17.) Generally the ring was worn for ornament on a linger of 
the right hand. The women wore several rings upon the fingers ; 
but besides these they wore others not only pendent from the 
ears, but also from the nose. These rings were according to the 
means of the person, of gold, silver, or some other metal. Some- 
times these rings were ornamented with jewels, (Isai., iii, 19; 
viii, 26), or with globules of solid gold. (Exod., xxxii, 2 ; Xumb., 
xxi, 50 ; Ezech., xvi, 11.) Such ornaments were worn pendent 
from the ears by men also in other nations; but among the 
Hebrews for a man to have his ears bored was a mark of slavery. 
(Judg., viii, 24.) The women also wore ornaments of gold or 
silver on the feet — in the shape of rings — and sometimes of 
chains. (See Isai., iii, 18.) The women's dress was at all times 
in the East of a most sumptuous kind. (Gen., xxiv, 22, 23, 52; 
Exod., xxv, 1, 7; JS^umb., xxi, 50; Isai., iii, 16, 26; Ezech., 
xvi, 10, and following.) In those countries matrons wear, and 
anciently also wore, besides the precious rings of which we have 
spoken, neck chains or collars of various kinds. These also were 
worn by illustrious men who had received them as a royal gift. 
(Gen,, xli, 42; Prov., iii, 4, 22 ; vi, 21 ; xiv, 24; Cant., i, 11 ; 
Cant., v, 7 ; xvi, 29.) The women also wore bracelets on the 
arms or wrists. (Ezech., xvi, 11.) JNor was the use of bracelets 



460 



OP THE DRESS OE THE HEBREWS. 



confined to women ; men of rank also wore them. (Gen., xxviii, 
18.) At the present day the ladies in the East wear three chains 
round the neck, and from the third, which reaches down to the 
girdle, and is commonly of gold and adorned with jewels, there 
are suspended small smelling boxes filled with musk and amber. 
These boxes Isaias speaks of in iii, 20, 24. The looking-glasses 
of the women are mentioned in Exodus. They were made of 
polished brass ; and hence we find that the brazen laver was 
made of the looking-glasses which the women offered for the 
work of the Tabernacle. (Exod., xxxviii, 8.) Of course the image 
was seen but obscurely in such a mirror. St. Paul takes from 
the metallic mirror — the sgotttpov — a beautiful comparison, in 
his first Epistle to the Corinthians, (xiii, 12.) Both men and 
women carried a handkerchief on the girdle, or in the hand, or 
on the left arm ; persons of rank had it made of embroidered 
stuff. Those things which were to be carefully preserved were 
rolled up in a handkerchief ; and it was used also for binding the 
head of dead bodies. (Luke, xix, 20; John, xi, 14; xx, 17.) 
The semicinctia of the Vulgate, mentioned in the Acts of the 
Apostles, (xix, 12,) which we translate aprons, were a sort of 
napkins which were placed round the neck to receive the per- 
spiration of the neck and face. Finally, sumptuous as the gar- 
ments in the East were in the times of which we treat, yet the 
form of them was so simple that the dress of one man would easily 
suit another. Hence we read in the scripture of a man giving from 
his wardrobe presents of garments to others ; thus Joseph gave 
to his brethren two robes each, but to Benjamin five robes. (Gen., 
xlv, 22.) Hence it was, also, that a great part of the treasures 
of the rich Easterns consisted in numerous suits of raiment. 
Thus Job speaks of the accumulation of riches: " If he shall 
heap together silver as earth, and prepare raiment as clay.' , 
(Job, xxvii, 16.) Our Eedeemer also alludes to treasures of gar- 
ments when He speaks of the treasures of the rich being liable 
to the depredations of the moth : " Lay not up to yourselves 
treasures on earth where the rust and moth consume." (St. Matt., 
vi, 19.) And St. Paul says of himself : (Acts, xx, 33,) " I have 
not coveted any man's silver, gold, or apparel" We learn also 
from the words of St. James, the apostle, that garments consti- 
tuted a great part of the treasures of the rich in his day, he 
says : " Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl in your miseries 
which shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and 
your garments are moth-eaten. Tour gold and silver are 
cankered, &c." (St. James, v, 1, 2, 3.) 



OF THE FOOD, AND REPASTS OF THE HEBREWS. 461 



CHAPTER VIII. 

OF THE FOOD, AND REPASTS OF THE HEBREWS. 

First. — Of the Different Kinds of Food. In the period before 
the deluge, we learn from the scripture, (Gen., i, 29,) that God 
assigned to men for nourishment the plants and the fruit of the 
trees. It informs us that after the deluge He gave, moreover, to 
Noe for the same use, the animals — at least it is only after the 
deluge that we find this concession expressly made. (Gen., ix, 
3, 6.) In that warm climate, however, the flesh of animals 
is not so salubrious, and hence it was by no means, in ancient 
times, the daily food of the Hebrew people, which ordinarily 
consisted of fruit, bread, herbs, and the milk of animals. Among 
the things which Shaw has recorded in his book, so often referred 
to already, is the fact, that the Easterns to a great extent derive 
their support almost entirely from food prepared from corn. 

Second. — Of Brink. Wine is mentioned in the scripture as 
early as the time of iSoe: however, it does not appear to have 
been in very frequent use among the ancient Hebrews, for it is 
not mentioned in the entertainment which Abraham gave to the 
angels, who, under the form of travellers, were received in his 
tent. At the sametime, it was occasionally used as a beverage 
in those times, as the case of Isaac proves. (Gen., xxvii, 25.) 
But water was the ordinary beverage, as it is to this day among 
the common people in Arabia. Although at the time of the so- 
journ of the Israelites in Egypt wine was much esteemed in that 
country, it is not probable that these drank of it ; because there 
were in the country but few soils in which the vines would 
grow, and the produce of them was reserved to the king and the 
chief men of the kingdom. During their sojourn in the deserts 
of Arabia, the wine which the Hebrews procured was chiefly for 
the sacred libations, (ExocL, xxix, 28, 40 ; Deut., xxix, 5) ; and 
as for the priests, it appears from the law of Moses that it would 
have been unlawful for them to exercise their functions in the 
Tabernacle on any day upon which they had drunk wine, or any 
intoxicating drink. (Lev., x, 9.) However, taking the period of 
the Jewish history on the whole, we find that the use of wine 
was by no means uncommon. There is even frequent reference 
in the scripture to excessive drinking of wine. Among the He- 
brews the wine was often mixed with spices. The shecar ( "OtP) 
translated in the Vulgate sieera, which we render in English, 



462 



OF THE POOD A XI) 



strong drinJc, is frequently mentioned in scripture, and means 
fermented liquor prepared, principally at least, from dates, per- 
haps sometimes from other kinds of fruit. The sicera, therefore, 
of the Tulgate appears to mean chiefly the palm wine — that is 
to say, the juice of the dates made intoxicating — either hy allow- 
ing it to corrupt and ferment ; or, if the juice was used in its 
fresh state, by an admixture of stimulating ingredients, of which 
there is an abundance in the East. If the fruit of other trees 
has been at anytime used to make the sicera, the like process 
do doubt, was adopted to render it intoxicating. 

Third. — Things which the Hebrews were Forbidden to Eat. 
These meats, forbidden to the Hebrews, were, some of them, un- 
clean, as being noxious, or at least filthy and abominable ; or 
they were unclean, because they were specially used by the un- 
clean "Gentiles in their idolatrous banquets ; or, in fine, some of 
them were forbidden, because consecrated to the altar of God. 
The unclean meats were : First, quadrupeds, which either do not 
ruminate, or which do ruminate, but haye not the hoof cloven. 
Second, serpents and creeping insects ; also certain insects which 
sometimes fly, and sometimes advance upon their feet; but 
locusts, in all their stages of existence, are accounted clean. 
Third, certain species of birds, the names of many of which are 
obscure. Fourth, fishes that want either fins or seales. Fifth, 
all food and liquids, and all wet seed-corn, being in a vessel into 
which the dead body of an unclean insect, or unclean animal 
had fallen, became unclean ; but the water in cisterns, wells, 
and fountains, and dried seed-corn were not defiled by an acci- 
dent of this sort. (Levit., xi, 38.) Sixth, when a man died in a 
tent or chamber, then all the food and liquids which stood in 
uncovered vessels in the tent or chamber, at the time of his 
death, were unclean. (Numb., xix, 15.) Seventh, everything 
which had been consecrated by any one to idols or false gods. 
(Exod., xxxiv, 15.) It was this prohibition which, in the primi- 
tive church, gave occasion to some dissensions, which St. Paul 
often corrects, particularly in his first epistle to the Corinthians, 
(viii, 10.) Eighth, a kid boiled in the milk of its mother. (Exod., 
xxiii, 19; xxxiv, 26; Deut., xiv, 21.) It is more probable 
that the object of this law was to inculcate humanity in the 
treatment of animals, although some think that the law had re- 
gard to a certain superstition in use among some of the heathen 
nations. The meats which were forbidden, because consecrated 
to God, were : First, blood. (Levit., iii, 9 ; vii, 26, 27 ; xvii, 10- 
14; Deut., xii, 16.) Second, an animal which had been torn 
by wild beasts, because the blood remained in the body. (Exod., 
xxii, 30 • Deut., xiv, 21.) Third, the fat covering the intes- 



.REPASTS OP THE HEBREWS. 



463 



tines, the great lobe of the liver, the kidneys and the fat adhering 
to them. (Exod., xxix, 13-22; Levit., iii, 4-10-15 ; iv, 9; vii, 4; 
ix, 10-19.) Fourth, the fat tail of sheep. (Levit., iii, 9 ; vii, 3, 
&c.) Through a custom taken from what is related of Jacob, 
(Gen., xxxii, 25-33,) the Hebrews abstained from the back-part 
of the thigh of animals. 

E ourth. — Of the Preparation of certain Kinds of Food. In the 
beginning corn was eaten from the -ear without any process of 
preparation ; and, hence, this mode of eating it is spoken of as 
still partially in use in Levit., (ii, 12) ; and Deut, (xxiii, 25.) But 
long before the time of Moses, men having discovered the use of 
fire in the preparation of food, had learned to prepare corn for 
food by several processes: first, they roasted the corn'; this 
roasted corn, together with the flour of it, is often mentioned in 
the Old Testament. When, however, some, to lessen the 
trouble of mastication, learned to bruise the grains of corn with 
pieces of wood, or with stones, this led to the invention of the 
mortar, and afterwards of the mill. The mill was by no means 
a recent invention in the time of Moses ; for we find, even iu 
Genesis, (xviii, 6,) a distinction made between the finer and 
coarser flour, which shows that the mill was in use before the 
age of Abraham. In the early times hand-mills alone were 
used : mills worked by asses, referred to in the Gospel, (Matt., 
xviii, 6,) were a much more recent invention. The common 
mill of the Hebrews differed but little from that which is still 
used in the East and in Egypt ; it was composed of two circular 
stones about two feet in diameter, and half a foot in thickness : 
the inferior stone was a little convex in the middle, and was 
fixed to the pavement ; the upper stone was moveable, and 
somewhat hollow in the middle, that it might exactly correspond 
to the inferior one : this upper stone had also a hole bored through 
it, by which the grain was cast in to be ground ; and the flour 
produced by the collision of the stones came out round about the 
under one, the convexity of its centre throwing it off. To the 
upper stone was fitted a handle, by which it was turned round. 
Sieves, made of interwoven pieces of bulrush, were used for 
separating the meal from the grains which had not been per- 
fectly bruised, and which were, therefore, cast again into the 
mill. Sieves made of horse hair were invented in the time of 
Pliny. Since, among the Hebrews there were neither public 
mills nor bakers, unless for the king's use, (Gen., xl, 2 ; Osee., 
vii, 4-10; Jerem., xxxvii, 21,) a mill was necessary for every 
one ; wherefore, it was forbidden to take a mill or millstone in 
pledge. (Levit., xxvi, 26; Numb., xi, 5; Deut., xxiv, 6.) In 
the beginning, barley was chiefly subjected to the mill, but alter- 



464 



REPASTS OF THE HEBREWS. 



wards wheat was principally used for making flour ; so that 
barley was left entirely to the poor. Barley-bread, under that 
warm climate, is better than it is in colder countries, but when 
kept over for a day it becomes insipid ; a thing which, in the 
East, happens also to wheaten bread ; wherefore, the bread is 
each day freshly baked, and hence, every day, about evening, 
the mills are set to work, from which a noise is heard in the 
streets. (Jerem., xxv, 10.) Formerly the mill was usually 
turned by two maid- servants of the lowest class, who, sitting 
face to face, had the mill between them ; so that one by means 
of the handle could move the stone half-way round ; and the 
other, taking the handle from the first, could move it the rest 
of the way. (Exod., xi, 5 ; Job, xxxi, 10, 11 ; Isai., xlvii, 2 ; 
Matt., xxiv, 41.) The labour was of a severe kind, and captive 
enemies were, sometimes, condemned to it as a mark of ignominy. 
(Judg., xvi, 21 ; Lamen., v, 13.) In the early period of the 
scripture history the duty of preparing and baking the bread 
was undertaken by the mother of the family ; and this duty was 
performed even by matrons of the highest rank, (Gen., xviii, 6, 
&c); but, in after times it devolved upon maid-servants. (1st 
Kings, viii, 13.) To these succeeded, as far as the king's house- 
hold was concerned, the king's bakers, who, in Egypt, were of 
a very early institution. (Osee, vii, 4-7.) The kneading trough 
was a wooden bowl, (Exod., vii, 28,) in which the flour, mixed 
with water, was formed into a mass or lump, which, after a 
certain interval of time, leaven being added, was kneaded. Eut 
if bread was to be prepared quickly it was made without leaven. 
The usual leaven in the East is dough kept till it becomes sour. 
The form of the loaves was round, and they were never of con- 
siderable thickness ; hence, the loaf was not cut with a knife, 
but broken with the hand. (Isai., lviii, 7 ; Lamen., iv, 4 ; Matt., 
xiv, 19 ; xv, 36 ; xxvi, 26.) According to Jahn, (Arckceol. Bill.,) 
there were four kinds of ovens in use among the Hebrews. 
First, the ground or floor, which was heated with the fire, and 
then the fire being removed, the cakes of dough were placed upon 
the heated earth, and after sometime turned, and finally covered 
with the fire and warm ashes ; if the cakes were not turned they 
were but imperfectly baked. (Osee, vii, 8.) In this way were 
prepared the panes suhcinericcn, or cakes made upon the hearth, 
so often mentioned in scripture. (Gen., xviii, 6, &c.) Second, 
a round pit in the earth, almost like a well : this kind of oven 
Jahn supposes to be referred to in Levit. (xi, 35.) The bottom 
of the pit was covered with stones, upon which a fire was made, 
and when the pit had been heated, the fire was removed, the 
loaves or cakes placed upon the hot stones, and the mouth of the 



EEPASTS OF THE HEBREWS. 



465 



pit closed. Third, an earthen vase, called tannour, ("On) which 
was of the shape of an inverted pot ; within it a fire was made, 
and when the vase or oven was well heated the dough was spread 
upon the outside of it, and almost instantly baked. Fourth, a 
plate of iron, upon which, when heated by fire placed under it, 
the cakes or masses of dough were placed. Jahn supposes that 
this may be the kind of oven spoken of in Levit. (ii, 5 ; vi, 14.) 
Cakes mixed with honey were greatly esteemed by the 
Hebrews. (Ezech., xvi, 13.) They had also various ways of 
using oil in the preparation of cakes. Shaw, from whom we 
have so often quoted before, has some observations which will 
illustrate several references in scripture to the matter of which 
we are treating. He states, then : "In cities and villages where 
there are public ovens the bread is usually leavened ; but 
among the Eedoweens and Kabyles, as soon as the dough is 
kneaded it is made into thin cakes, either to be baked imme- 
diately upon the coals, or else in a shallow earthen vessel like a 
frying-pan, called a tajen. Such were the unleavened cakes which 
we so often read of in scripture ; such also were th^e cakes made 
by Sara. (Gen., xviii, 6.) Most families grind their wheat and 
barley at home, having two portable millstones for that pur- 
pose ; the uppermost whereof is turned round by a small handle 
of wood or iron that is placed in the rim. When this stone is 
large, or expedition is required, then a second person is 
called in to assist ; and as it is usual for the women alone 
to be concerned in this employment, who seat themselves over 
against each other with the millstones between them, we may 
see not only the propriety of the expression, of the handmaid 
that is at the mill, (Exod., xi, 5,) but the force of another (Matt., 
xxiv, 41,) two women shall be grinding at the mill, one s-hall 
be taken, and one shall be left. The custom which these women 
have of singing during the time they are thus employed, is the 
same with what is related in an expression of Aristophanes, pre- 
served by Athene us." {Shaw, vol. 1, pages 415, 416.) The 
food, as has been said already, was in the ancient times drawn 
chiefly from the vegetable kingdom. There were various kinds 
of bread. Lentils, also, were a common article of food ; and they 
are still much used by the Easterns. (Gen., xxv, 30-34.) Eiesh 
meat was only served up when a guest was present, or at ban- 
quets. (Gen., xviii, 7 ; Deut., xv, 20.) The Easterns even to 
this day use flesh but sparingly. When luxury began to prevail, 
meat became an everyday dish with the higher sort. A prefer- 
ence was given to the flesh of wild animals, and to that of the 
fattened young oxen. (Gen., xviii, 4-20 ; xli, 2 ; 1st Kings xvi, 
20 ; xxviii, 24; 2nd Kings, vi, 13, &c.) The flesh of sheep and 

2 H 



466 



OF THE FOOD AXD 



goats, and particularly of lambs and kids, is considered exquisite 
in those countries. In the very ancient times the animal was 
chosen from the flock, and killed by the father of the family, no 
matter how high his rank, (Gen., xviii, 2-6 ; Judg., vi, 19) ; just 
as it devolved upon the mother of the family in every case to pre- 
pare for the table the flesh of the animal after it had been killed. 
(Gen., xiii, 6.) Among the parts of the animal the shoulder 
was preferred. (1st Kings, ix, 23, 24.) The art of cookery had 
even so early as the time referred to in Gen., (xxvii, 3, 4-9, 10,) 
arrived at such perfection that it could deceive the palate. When 
the animal was killed, the whole of the flesh was immediately 
prepared for food, on account of the difficulty of keeping it for 
any time untainted in that warm climate ; which custom is even 
still observed by the nomadic tribes, although the art of drying 
flesh-meat in the sun, and even of corning and preserving it has 
become known. Flesh-meat was prepared for the table either 
by roasting or boiling it : roasting appears to have been the more 
ancient way. Locusts are an ordinary article of food with the 
common people in the East, and are prepared by being roasted : 
they take off the wings, the feet, and remove the intestines, then 
salt them, and fixing them on a rod, as on a spit, they put them 
to the fire till they are sufficiently roasted to be eaten. But 
this is not the only way of preparing the locusts — for they are 
also boiled : another mode of preparing them is to dry them in 
the sun, grind them, and convert them into bread; finally, they 
are also salted and laid up in a compressed mass, from which 
slices are cut- from time to time, and eaten. (Levit., xi, 22; 
Matt., iii, 4.) Some kinds of locusts are reputed noxious; 
wherefore in Levit., (xi, 12.) only certain species of them are 
declared to be clean. 

Fifth. — Of the Seasoning of their Food. As simplicity was the 
distinguishing feature of the early times, so the way in which 
they took their food was exceedingly simple. Sauces, by which 
the appetite is provoked, and the palate gratified, made no part 
of the repast in those times ; and hence, even in the banquet 
which Abraham made for the three angels, no such thing is 
mentioned ; however, the art of cookery was not slow in intro- 
ducing such delicacies. It does not appear from the scripture, 
that spices were used by the Hebrews as a seasoning for their 
food : the ordinary condiment was salt, honey, oil, and milk. 
The Spouse in the Canticles only mentions (as appertaining to 
His banquet,) fruits, honey, milk, and wine. (Canticles, v, i.) 
Honey entered into almost all the sauces of the Hebrews ; and 
even to this day it is much used for the same purpose in Pales- 
tine, where it is very common. However, the Hebrews were 



EEPASTS OF THE HEBREWS. 



467 



always very sparing in this matter of sauces, and for the most 
part contented themselves with eating the meat simply boiled or 
roasted. Salt, the use of which is most ancient, was an ingre- 
dient that was never wanting in the seasoning of food ; and 
for this reason, and because it has the virtue of preserving 
bodies from corruption, it became among the Easterns the sym- 
bol of an inviolable friendship of conservation and of wisdom ; 
and the expression, an alliance, or covenant of salt, means a firm 
and perpetual alliance. (Levit., ii, 13 ; ]S T umb., xviii, 19 ; Matt., 
v, 13; Mark, ix, 49; Coloss., iv, 6.) 

Sixth. — Of their Meals: and first, of the hour of the repast, 
and the practices observed at it. We find in the Gospel distinct 
mention made of dinner and supper. (Luke, xi, 37 ; xiv, 12.) 
As we find no other meal mentioned in scripture, we may infer 
that the Jews regularly ate but twice in the day. The dinner, 
or early repast, was but a very moderate refection, the principal 
meal being the supper. The most usual hour for dinner, accord- 
ing to Calmet, was noon, or mid-day. It was at this hour that 
Joseph had the repast sent up to his brethren. (Gen,., xliii, 25.) 
The author of Ecclesiastes pronounces a country unhappy, the 
princes of which eat in the morning. (Eccl., x, 16.) St. Peter, 
accused of being under the influence of wine, removes the impu- 
tation by saying that it was but the third hour of the day, that 
is to say, according to our manner of counting, nine o'clock in 
the forenoon. This answer of the apostle implies that the hour 
had not arrived for the first repast of the day. We find that in the 
house of Simon the tanner, dinner was prepared for the same 
apostle at mid-day. (Acts, ii, 15; x, 9, 10.) On fast days the 
Jews made but one meal, and that in the evening. The reason 
why the people of the East put off their principal repast until 
evening appears very natural — it is on account of the excessive 
heat in those countries at mid-day, which diminishes the appe- 
tite, and represses that hilarity which they wished to accompany 
the taking of their favourite meal. The Hebrews never ate 
without having first washed their hands , and we find by the 
Gospel that the custom of washing the hands at meals had been 
carried by them to a superstitious excess. (See Matt., xv, 1-3 ; 
Mark, vii, 2-4.) The repast was preceded by prayer. Traces of 
this laudable custom are found in the first book of Kings, (ix, 13.) 
In the time of our Redeemer prayer both preceded and followed 
the repast. It belonged to the father of the family to pronounce 
the blessing before the meal, and to return thanks to the Lord 
before quitting the table. We know not precisely in what 
terms these prayers were conceived ; but the formula con- 
tained in the Talmuds comes to this — " Bles ed be Thou, 



468 



OF THE FOOD AXD 



Lord, our God ! King of the world, who producest this 
food from the earth ; and this drink from the vine." Not only 
is this usage of commencing and finishing the repast with prayer 
religiously observed by the Jews, but also by the Turks and 
Arabs, as is proved by the testimony of all those who have 
travelled in the East. As to the manner of placing the guests, 
Calmet observes, (Dissertatio de re Cilaria Hebraorum, in librum 
Ecclesiastici,) that when many persons were at 'the same table, 
the place of honour was at the head of the table, near the wall 
at the end of the room : this is the place which Samuel assigned 
to Saul before he anointed him king, (1st Kings ix, 22) ; 
and this is the place which Saul occupied in his own family 
after he became king. (1st Kings, xx, 25.) It is probably to 
this place of honour that the author of the book of Proverbs 
makes allusion when he says : " Appear not glorious before the 
king, and stand not in the place of great men. For it is better 
that it should be said to thee come up hither, than that thou 
shouldst be humbled before the prince." (Proverbs, xxv, 6, 7.) 
After the same manner does our Redeemer in the gospel reprove 
the pride of the Pharisees, who, when invited to a banquet, 
always ambitioned the first places. (Luke, xiv, 7, and following.) 

Eighth. — Of the Table and Seats. We do not remark in the 
scripture anything precise, either upon the matter or the form 
of the tables of the Hebrews ; but it is supposed that we may 
fairly conclude as to how they were provided in this particular 
by considering the customs of the people of the Levant at the 
present day. In this way, then, does Shaw speak from his own 
observations in the kingdoms of Algiers and Tunis. He is speak- 
ing of Turks, Moors, Kabyles, and Arabs ; and his words are in- 
teresting, not only for the allusion to the kind of table in use 
among these people, but also as explaining their manner of eating, 
which, doubtless, resembles the ancient Jewish custom : — " All 
the several orders and degrees of these people, from the Bedoween 
to the Bashaw, eat in the same manner ; first washing their 
hands, and then sitting themselves down cross-legged, their usual 
posture of sitting, round about a mat or a low table, where their 
dishes are placed. No use is made of a table cloth ; each person 
contenting himself with a share of a long towel that is carelessly 
laid round about the mat or table. Knives and spoons likewise 
are of little service ; for their animal food being always well 
roasted or boiled, requires no carving. The cuscassowe, pilloe, 
and other dishes also, which we should reckon among spoon- 
meats, are served up in the same manner, in a degree of heat 
little better than lukewarm ; whereby the whole company eat of 
it greedily, without the least danger of burning or scalding thei r 



EEPASTS OF THE HEBREWS. 



469 



fingers. The flesh they tear into morsels, and the cuseassowe 
they make into pellets, squeezing as much of them both together 
as will make a mouthful. When # their food is of a more liquid 
nature, such as oil and vinegar, robb, hatted milk, honey, &c, 
then, after they have broken their bread or cakes into little 
bits, (-vj^w/x/a or sops,) they fall on as before, dipping their hands 
and their morsels together therein." (Matt., xxvi, 23 ; Ruth, ii, 
14; John, xiii, 26. — Shaw's Travels, vol. 1, pages 417-18.) Like 
the other ancient peoples of the East, it appears that the He- 
brews also sat at table. At the same time, Amos, (vi, 4-7.) 
Tobias, (ii, 3,) and Ezechiel, (xxiii, 41,) speak of couches of the 
table ; but, as Calmet remarks, the usage to which they refer, of 
reclining at table, was not universal; since we find mention in 
authors of the same time, or of later times, of the custom of 
sitting at meals. The usage of reclining at table was very 
ancient among the Persians ; and in the time of our Redeemer it 
was very general among the Jews. There were ordinarily in the 
apartment in which the meals were taken, or banquets prepared, 
three couches, or more according to the number of the guests. 
From the usual number of three couches — or from three upon 
a couch — come the names triclinium, (the banquet couches — also 
the dining hall,) arc/ntriclinus, (the steward of the feast.) Each 
•one reclined on the left side, having his face turned towards the 
table ; and as they were placed one after another, hence the 
second in order had his head on the breast of the first, the third 
had his head on the breast of the second, and so on. It is in this 
way that we are to explain what is said of St. John in the gospel, 
that he reclined on the bosom of Jesus. (John, xiii, 23.) We 
do not find, on examining the instances recorded in scripture, 
that when guests were invited, the women ate together with the 
men. If they ever appear upon such occasions, it is only to per- 
form some service for the guests, or those at table. The Baby- 
lonians and Persians did not follow this custom of excluding 
women ; and the Hebrews themselves ceased to follow it, at 
least at their private repasts, when none but the family were 
present. On this matter, Pareau has the following observation : — 
" Eroni the most remote antiquity the women do not appear to 
have eaten together with the men, but in a part of the house 
assigned to themselves. This was the ancient custom of all the 
Easterns, from which, however, the Babylonians and Persians 
sometimes departed; and sometimes, for peculiar reasons, the 
Hebrews themselves. " (Pareau, Antiq. Hehr., p. 4, c. 3, § 3, n. 
45.) In the same context with what we have just now quoted 
froru Shaw, that traveller observes : — " At all these festivals and 
entertainments the men are treated in separate apartments from 



470 OF THE FOOD AXD REP.ISTS OF THE HEBREWS. 

the women ; not the least intercourse or communication being 
ever allowed betwixt the two sexes. " (Shaw, ubi supra.) 

Mnth. — Of the Marnier of Eating. We may infer from what 
has been said, that the Hebrews, like other Easterns, made no 
use, in eating, either of spoons, of forks, or of knives. It is true 
that there is question of forks in the first book of Kings, (ii, 13, 
14,) but the only use of this instrument was to draw the meat 
out of the pots in which it was cooked. In several parts of the 
East it is the custom to serve up at once all the viands which 
compose the meal or banquet. Everything leads us to believe 
that the Hebrews followed the same custom. In the ancient 
times the master of the repast or feast divided the viands, which 
he distributed to each guest, always taking care to serve more 
abundantly the person whom he wished principally to honour, 
(1st Kings, i, 4, 5; ix, 22, 24); but in after times the usage 
prevailed which is still found among the Easterns, according to 
which all ate without distinction at the same dish. As soon as 
the guests were placed at table, the wine to be used at the re- 
past was drawn from the larger jars or skins into a pitcher or 
pitchers, into which each dipped his bowl or cup, which at first 
is supposed to have been made of wood or horn ; afterwards it 
was made of brass lined with tin, such as travellers still use in 
those countries. In the houses of the rich, even so early as the 
time of Moses, these vessels were made of gold and silver. 
(See Numb., vii, 12, 13; comp., 3rd Kings, x, 21.) At the 
more solemn repasts he who presided presented to all the guests 
a cup, from which they drank in succession, one after the other ; 
a custom which has given occasion to the sacred writers often 
to use, by a figure of speech, cap or chalice in place of lot, share. 
(Matt., xxvi, 27; Psal., lxxiv, 9; Isai., li, 22; Jerem., xxv, 
15 ; Ezech., xxiii, 32, &c.) 

Tenth. — Of Banquets. Prosperity naturally prompts a 
person to communicate his joy to others, and in this way has it 
led to the celebration of feasts or banquets. Hence it is not 
surprising that the mention of banquets should occur in the 
earliest records of the customs of men. (Gen., xxii, 8 ; xxviii, 
22; xxix, 22; xxxi, 27.) The law of Moses insists upon the 
payment by the Hebrews of the second tithes, which were dedi- 
cated to sacrifices and banquets, (Deut., xii, 4, 19 ; xiv, 22, 29 ; 
xvi, 10, 11); to these the law also added the second-born of 
animals, and the second first-fruits, and commanded that to 
these feasts, not only their sons and daughters, but also their 
slaves — male and female, the poor, the widows, the orphans, and 
the Levites should be invited. (Deut, xvi, 11, 14 ; xii, 12, 18.) 
Servants were employed to invite the guests, who were called at 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



471 



a fixed time : that is, the invitation preceded the banquet by a 
certain fixed interval. (Matt, xxii, 24; Luke, xiv, 7.) They 
(the guests) were anointed with precious oil. (Amos., vi, 6 ; 
Matt., xiv, 3 ; Luke, vii, 37, 38.) All the guests appeared in 
festive, that is, in white garments. (Eccles, ix, 8.) The mag- 
nificence of a banquet sometimes appeared in the quantity of 
the meats, sometimes in the variety of the dishes or sorts of 
food. But above all things, wine was the principal item in the 
feast. From the wine is derived the Hebrew name for the 
banquet, the time of drinking . (Isai, xxii, 13.) This drinking at 
banquets was carried by degrees to such excess among all nations 
that it was often continued from evening until the folio wing- 
morning. Such feasts were the Kw/xo/, which we find con- 
demned in the apostolic writings. (Rom., xiii, 13 ; Gal., v, 21 ; 
1st Peter, iv, 3.) As the banquet was always a supper, and 
consequently at a late period of the evening, or at night, it was 
necessary to have the banqueting room lighted up with lamps ; 
by attending to this observation, and also to the fact that in that 
climate by night, or at least at day-break, it was always cold, 
we shall better understand the following passages in St. Mat- 
thew's Gospel, (viii, 12 ; xxii, 13 ; xxv, 30.) As for the rest, 
in banquets which were joyous meetings, jests, enigmas, music, 
were not wanting : wherefore banquets were everywhere an 
image of felicity, and exclusion from the banquet a symbol of 
misery and calamity. (Proverbs, ix, 2, and following ; Amos., 
vi, 4, 5 ; Isaias, v, 12 ; vii, 9 ; Matt., xxvi, 20, 26 ; Luke, vii, 
46, 50; xii, 1, 9.) Hence, also; the kingdom of the Messias is 
represented under this image of a banquet. (Luke, vii, 39, 46 ; 
xiv, 12; Matt., viii, 11; xxvi, 29.) This trope was so well 
known that the ancient interpreters of the sacred volume em- 
ployed promiscuously the words, to rejoice and to feast, joy and 
a banquet. As the banquets of the Hebrews were so frequently 
prepared from the sacrifices, hence the guests should be undefiled 
or holy, a circumstance which is also taken into account in the 
tropes and allegories of the scripture. (Ezech., xxxix, 16, 20 ; 
Isai., xxxiv, 4 ; Apoc, xix, 17, 18.) 



CHAPTER IX. 

OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY AMONG THE HEBBEWS. 

This subject comprises the following heads, viz. : — First, of 
husband and wife, or wives ; second, of parents and children ; 
third, of masters and slaves. 



472 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY 



First. — Of the Relation of Husband and Wife, or Wives. In 
the first place the very stringent laws enacted by Moses for the 
preservation of public morality were calculated to exert a most 
salutary influence in promoting domestic peace and happiness. 
The immorality which those laws sought to repress and eliminate 
was at all times opposed to that law which God had written 
upon the heart; of man ; and we see how the virtuous patriarchs 
of the early time guarded against it. In the time of Moses the 
general depravity of the world had made such progress that not 
only were persons found to prostitute themselves to the commis- 
sion of shameful crimes, but even the most abominable impuri- 
ties had become, among the idolators, a part of their religious 
worship. (Gen., xxxviii, 21, 22; Numb,, xxv, 1 ; Deut., xxiii, 
18.) In order to guard the Hebrews against these disorders, 
and to preserve them from the contagion of the vices by which 
they were surrounded, Moses ordained that they should not 
suffer a prostituted person to be among them ; and that if the 
daughter of a priest were found guilty of this abomination, she 
should be stoned and burned. And lest the priests, either in- 
cited by avarice, or seduced by the example of the idolaters, 
should ever be tempted to defile the holy worship of God by 
associating such crimes with it, Moses severely prohibited 
them to accept as an offering for the sanctuary the wages of 
prostitution. As for seduction, the Mosaic law enacted that the 
most perfect reparation possible should be made for the crime : 
it obliged the seducer to a pecuniary satisfaction towards the 
father of his victim ; obliged him, moreover, to marry her 
whom he had seduced in case that her father consented ; and 
alter the marriage took place, it debarred him (the seducer) 
as long as she lived from the privilege of divorce. As a further 
security for female chastity, the law decreed that if anyone 
had before marriage declared herself a virgin, and was after- 
wards convicted of falsehood in this statement, she should be 
stoned before the door of her father's house. (Exodus, xxii, 
16, 17; Deut., xxii, 23-29.) These laws, notwithstanding that 
they were recommended at the same time by great wisdom and 
great severity, did not prevent prostitution among the Hebrews, 
and prostitution of the most shameful kind, particularly during 
the reigns of the idolatrous kings. 

Of Polygamy. — According to the primitive institution of 
marriage, polygamy was not permitted. (Matthew, xix, 4, 8.) 
Lamech was the first who transgressed the law of monogamy, 
established by the Creator, by marrying two wives — Ada and 
Sella. (Gen., ii, 24; iv, 19.) We find JSToe and his sons observ- 
ing this law of monogamy ; but that polygamy did not continue 



AMONG THE HEBKEWS. 



473 



to be prohibited after the deluge appears from the example of 
the patriarchs, Abraham and Jacob. In the time of Moses the 
greater part of the Jews had more wives than one. This is 
proved by the fact that in the taking of the census, recorded 
in Numbers, (iii,) out of - 603,550 men, there were as many 
as 22,273 first-born.* The Mosaic law did not alter an 
usage so firmly and widely established ; meanwhile it so treated 
of the matter, and contained such enactments, as to guard against 
an immoderate use of the liberty. First, it reminded the Jews 
that monogamy was of Divine institution, recording the epoch 
when it was violated for the first time; secondly, it placed 
before them the inconveniences, the quarrels, and the dissen- 
sions which ordinarily result from polygamy. (Gen., ii, 18-24 ; 
iv, 19 ; vi, 4-10 ; xxx, 1-3.) Third, it forbade the future 
kings of the Hebrews to have a great number of wives. Finally, 
it created other obstacles to excess in this particular, and the 
result of all was that the tendency to polygamy on the part 
of the Jews was considerably diminished through time. 

Of the Selection of the Bride or Bridegroom. — AVe see by 
several passages of the scripture, that it was the father of the 
family who made choice of the spouse for his son, and of the 
husband for his daughter. Even when the young man had be- 
come acquainted with the female, and desired to marry her, he 
applied to his father that he might be permitted to ask her of 
her parents. This usage exists still among the Arabians, for, 
D'Arvieux, in the description which he gives of their customs, 
says, among other things, " that when a young man sees a young 
woman who pleases him, he engages his father to ask her for 
him, and the fathers of the two meet and agree upon the price 
of the bride." (Memoires D'Arvieux, t., iii, p. 303.) By an 
ancient usage, which is not written anywhere, but which is seen 
in the history itself of the Hebrews, the brothers of the young 
woman were a party to the agreement regarding her marriage ; 
so that their consent, as well as that of her father, was neces- 
sarily to be obtained. (Gen., xxiv, 50 ; xxxiv, 11-27, &c.) Lest 
the Hebrews might be drawn into idolatry, the law forbade them 
to contract any marriage with the Chanaanites. Esdras and 
JNehemias afterwards extended this prohibition to all the Gentile 
nations. To the priests it was forbidden to contract marriage 
with a harlot, or with one who had suffered violence, or with a 
woman who had been divorced from a former husband ; and the 
High Priest, moreover, could not take to wife a widow, or any 

* By first-born are understood, as has been explained already, the 
first-born of the mother. 



474 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY 



one from a strange nation. (Levit., xxi, 7-13-14.) In defect of 
brothers, the daughters inherited ; and in this case they were 
obliged to marry a man of their own tribe and family, in order 
that the inheritance might not depart either from the tribe or 
the family. (Numb., xxvii, 1-11 ; xxxvi, 1-12.) As for the 
consanguinity and affinity, which were impediments to marriage 
in the old law, we collect from Levit., (xviii,) that consanguinity 
was an obstacle to marriage in the following cases, viz., with 
father or mother — son or daughter — with a sister — with a grand- 
daughter — with the sister of one's father or mother : and affinity 
was an obstacle in these cases, viz. : with a step-mother — with a 
step-sister — with a step-daughter, or step-grand-daughter — with 
an uncle's wife — with a brother's widow, (unless the brother had 
died without children) — with a son's wife — with the sister of one's 
own wife, during the lifetime of the wife : for, if the wife died, 
it was then lawful to marry her sister. — See Eecanus, Analogia 
Vet. et Novi Test., cap. xxii, Quaes. 2. 

Of the Espousals. — The espousals in Hebrew, EHM, (eres,) was 
a contract respecting the future marriage made before witnesses, 
between the lather and brothers of the bride on one side, and the 
father of the bridegroom on the other. The espousals had for 
object, not only the union of the parties, but everything besides, 
which regarded the presents to be made to the brothers of the 
bride, and the sum to be paid to her father. Sometimes : — but 
these were cases of exception — the bride received a dowry from 
her father. (Jos., xv, 18, 19; 1st Kings, ix, 16.) The rabbins 
teach that the espousals usually preceded the marriage by a con- 
siderable period — six months, or even a year. However, this 
usage was not general; since the young Tobias, (Tob., vii, 14 
and following,) having asked Sara for wife, the marriage was 
arranged and celebrated without delay. In every case, however, 
counting from the day on which the espousals were celebrated, 
the marriage was looked upon as a settled thing, and the woman 
received the title of spouse, although she had not yet entered 
the habitation of her future husband. It was for this reason 
that, if the destined husband after the espousals refused to con- 
tract a definite marriage, he was obliged to give a bill of divorce 
to the woman ; and if the woman on her part was guilty of crime 
with another man, she was treated as an adulteress. As the 
general custom among the Hebrews was for the husband to buy 
the spouse for a certain sum of money, hence she was regarded, 
in many instances, almost in the light of a servant. Yet not a 
few instances are recorded in scripture in which the wife exer- 
cised a great influence over the husband. (1st Kings, xxv, 19-30 ; 
3rd Kings, xi, 2-5; xix, 1-2 ; xxi, 7-8.) 



AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



475 



Of the Nuptials. — When the day of the nuptials arrived, the 
bridegroom ordered a banquet to be prepared at his house, and 
having dressed in festive garments, accompanied by young men 
of his own age, in the midst of joyous songs and the sound of 
musical instruments, he went to the house of the bride ; who, on 
her part, having decked herself in her most brilliant attire, and 
having a crown upon her head, (whence she was called the 
crowned,) being escorted by young females of her own age, thus 
followed the bridegroom in pomp to his house. At a later 
period this procession with the bride, which took place in the 
evening, was accompanied with torches, which were carried be- 
fore her, as the Talmudists relate, and as it is inferred from the 
gospel. (Matt., xxv, 1-12.) Having arrived at the house of the 
bridegroom the men enjoyed themselves at a great banquet— the 
banquet of the women being celebrated in a separate apartment. 
The marriage feast was celebrated for a week among the Jews, 
which custom had come down from very ancient times, as we 
learn from the book of Judges, (xiv, 12.) 

Of Concubines, or wives of the second class. — The name concu- 
bine generally in ancient authors, and even with us at this day, 
signifies a woman, who, though she be not married to a man, 
yet lives with him as his wife : but in the sacred writings concu- 
bine has quite a different meaning. There it means a lawful 
wife, but of a lower order — interior in rank to the mistress of 
the family. The husband was bound to treat her as a lawful 
wife ; she could not be sold, and her issue was legitimate. But 
in all other respects these concubines were inferior to the prin- 
cipal wife. The solemnity of the nuptials which we have 
described was omitted in the case of a concubine ; she had no 
authority in the family, nor any share in household government. 
If she had been a servant in the family before she came to be a 
concubine, she continued to be so afterwards, and in the same 
subjection to her mistress as before. 

Of the law regarding the brother of a husband icho died without 
issue. — The law, according to which the brother or next of kin 
to the deceased husband should marry the widow of his brother 
or kinsman, who had died without leaving children, and accord- 
ing to which law, the first-born son of such marriage was to be 
considered the son of the deceased husband and to inherit his 
property; this law, as we know from Genesis, (xxxviii, 3-10,) 
was much more ancient than the time of Moses. It was by cus- 
tom that the law had force before that Moses embodied the 
custom in his legislation. The Jewish legislator at the same 
time carefully provided for the liberty of marriage. The law, 



476 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY 



in reality, permitted the kinsman to refuse in such case to marry 
the widow, provided that he made a declaration of his refusal in 
the public place in the presence of judges ; permission being 
granted at the same time to the widow to take off Ids shoe and to 
spit in his face: the law, moreover, declared that Ms house should 
he called in Israel the house of the unshod. (Deut., xxv, 7-10 : see 
also Ruth, iv, 7, 8.) Jahn observes, that cases may be supposed 
in which it was an easy matter to resign one's-self to this insult 
rather than be exposed to all the inconveniences arising from a 
marriage, towards which one might have felt nothing but dis- 
gust. 

Of Adultery. — Adultery has been always regarded among 
the several nations of the world as a horrible crime, which de- 
serves to be severely punished. We know not what precise 
punishment was inflicted upon it among the Hebrews before the 
introduction of the [Mosaic law. This law decreed against 
adultery the penalty of death to be inflicted both upon the 
adulterer and the adulteress. The kind of death was not 
determined by the law in express words, but it is inferred from 
several passages in the scripture that the punishment of death iii 
this case was to be inflicted by stoning. (John, viii, 5 ; Ezekiel, 
xvi, 38-40 ; compare also Exod., xxxi, 14 ; xxxv, 2, withXumb., 
xv, 35, 36.) 

Of the Wife suspected of Adultery. — The law regarding this 
matter is laid down in the book of jSumbers. (v, 11-31.) It en- 
acts that the wife suspected of adultery shall be brought by her 
husband to the priest ; that having arrived at the Tabernacle with 
her head uncovered, and standing before the altar she shall 
declare her innocence with an oath, holding, at the same time in 
her hands a barley cake, as an oblation to God ; that this oath 
accompanied by frightful imprecations, to which the woman will 
answer amen, shall be committed to writing : the writing to be 
then effaced with the water called the water of bitterness, which 
the woman shall drink. Then it was, that according to the 
promise of the law, this water would become for the perjured 
woman a terrible poison, whilst it would do no injury to the 
faithful wife. We may remark here that Hoses must have been 
perfectly sure of his inspiration when he laid down such a law 
as this, for, if it failed to produce its effect it would soon fall 
into discredit and contempt, which would result in a disregard 
for the whole law r of which it formed a part. We see the 
admirable ends which this enactment served ; in the case of 
innocent wives it dissipated the jealousy of husbands, and thus 
it diminished the number of divorces ; in the case of ill-disposed 
women it either prevented the commission of the crime by the 



AMONG- THE HEBREWS. 



477 



dread which it inspired, or it led to the just punishment of the 
offender. 

Of Divorce. — The law of Moses permitted divorce, but a 
certain formality was to be observed. The husband was obliged 
to give a written bill of divorce to the wife ; and it was only 
when the woman provided with the bill of divorce had left her 
husband's house that the act of separation was valid : nay, even 
after that it was lawful for the husband to receive again the 
divorced wife, but by no means if she was already united in 
marriage with another. (Deut., xxiv, 1-4 ; comp. Jerem., iii, 1.) 
The reason which justified the giving of a bill of divorce is 
stated in Deut. (xxiv, 1-4.) The passage is rather obscure to 
us, but must have been clear enough for the ancient Hebrews. 
At a later period, however, after the return from the captivity, 
a great dispute arose on this point, and in our Redeemer's time 
the Jewish doctors of the two famous schools of Hillel and 
Sharamai took different views of the question : the school of 
Hillel contending that any cause, no matter how trivial, justified 
the husband in giving a bill of divorce, whilst the school of Sham- 
mai restricted the privilege of divorce to the case of adultery. 
(Comp., Matt., xix, 1-10.) The law did not confer upon the wife 
the privilege of divorcing the husband : but towards the end of the 
Jewish state and kingdom, women of the higher class, after the ex- 
ample of the Roman matrons, claimed to themselves the right of 
divorce. (Josephus, Antiq. xv, 7, § 10; see Mark, vi, 17-29; x, 
12.) According to the law, if the wife considered herself aggrieved 
she could seek at the hands of the judge a bill of divorce. (Exod., 
xxi, 10.) 

Of Childbirth. — At nr?t, mothers were the only assistants of 
their daughters at childbirth. Among the Hebrews, mid wives 
were sometimes employed, (Gen., xxxv, 17 ; xxxviii, 28) ; but 
it was only in difficult cases. (Exod., i, 19.) In Egypt the 
care of assisting women in childbirth was committed to midwives. 
(Exod., i, 15, and follow.) From Ezechiel, (xvi, 4,) we learn 
that the child as soon as it was born was washed, rubbed with 
salt, and wrapped in swaddling clothes. The birthday of the 
child, especially if it was a son, was celebrated as a festival, 
(Gen., xxi, 6,) which was solemnized every succeeding year by 
a banquet. (Gen., xl, 20 ; Job, i, 4; Matt., xiv, 6.) The 
woman who had given birth to a son was legally unclean 
for seven days, and for the thirty-three days following was 
to remain at home : after the birth of a daughter, the num- 
ber of these days was doubled, that is to say she was legally 
unclean for fourteen days ; and for the sixty-six days following 
was to remain at home — away from the Tabernacle or temple. 



478 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY 



After the lapse of these days the mother came to the Taber- 
nacle or the temple, arid offered as a sacrifice of purification, 
a lamb of a year old for a holocaust, and a young pigeon or 
a turtle for a sin-offering; but if she was poor, she offered a 
pair of turtle doves or two young pigeons. (Levit., xii, 1-8 ; 
Luke, ii, 22.) 

Of Circumcision. — On the eighth day after the birth the male 
children were circumcised. The Hebrews were the only people 
among whcm circumcision was obligatory for all the male child- 
ren, and prescribed as an act of religion : and we find them at 
all periods of their history reckoning it an honour and a glory 
to be distinguished from all the nations by this characteristic sign. 

Of Giving a Name to the Child. — Anciently the child re- 
ceived its name immediately after birth ; but after the introduc- 
tion of circumcision, the male child had its name given to it at 
the ceremony. Among the Easterns the name is never devoid 
of meaning ; and in the early ages was taken from some circum- 
stance of the person, time, or history : often, also from some one 
of the names of God, with an addition of some epithet or other 
name. Sometimes the name was also prophetical. At a more 
recent period names were selected from the ancestors or elders 
of the family ; and hence, in the latter books of scripture the 
ancient names for the most part recur. The Easterns not unfre- 
quently, and for some slight cause, change their name ; hence so 
many persons occur in scripture having two names. Kings and 
princes also changed the names of their ministers and servants, 
principally when they first entered their service, or when they 
were promoted by them to some higher dignity. Hence, name 
is used in scripture to signify dignity. The Easterns, moreover, 
add to their own name the name of their father, and sometimes 
of their grandfather, great-grandfather, &c, that thus they 
may be distinguished from others of the same name. 

Of the Firstborn Son. — The firstborn son, that is the first- 
born son of the father, was ordinarily the most cherished child 
of the family. Before Closes, fathers could, according to 
pleasure, transfer the rights of the firstborn to a younger son ; 
but this inspired legislator took away this power from them, on 
account of the abuses and unfortunate results to which the exer- 
cise of it might lead. The rights of the firstborn son were : 
First, pre-eminence over the rest of the family. (Gen., iv, 7 ; 2 
Paralip., xxi, 3.) Second, a double portion in the paternal in- 
heritance. (Dent., xvi, 17; 1st Paralip., v, 1, 2.) Third, the 
priesthood ; but, according to the law of Closes, the priesthood 
was restricted to the family of Aaron. Fourth, the paternal 
benediction, which it is to be supposed was of a special character, 



AMONG THE HEBREWS-. 



479 



not to exclude the other children from a blessing of some sort. 
(Gen., xxvii, 35, 36; Heb., xi, 21-39.) Finally, it was, more- 
over, the right of the firstborn son to inherit the throne of his 
father, who had been king ; and, therefore, it was only by an 
exception, founded upon a special disposition of divine Providence, 
that David designated as his successor in the kingdom, Solomon, 
although he was not the eldest of his sons. These favours and 
privileges stamped the highest value on the right of primogeni- 
ture ; and hence the sacred writers have used the term firstborn 
son, to convey the idea of singular divinity and pre-eminence. 
(See Isai., xiv, 30 ; PsaL, lxxxviii, 22 ; Job, xviii, 3 ; Pom., 
viii, 29; Coloss., i, 15-18; Heb., xii, 13; Apoc, i, 5-11.) 

Of the Education of Children. — In the early times of the 
Hebrew commonwealth, mothers suckled their children them- 
selves, and that for a period of thirty or thirty- six months, and 
the day on which the child was weaned was kept as a festival. 
(Gen., xxi, 8; Exod., ii, 7-9 ; 1st Kings, i, 22-24 ; 2nd Paral., 
xxxi, 16; 2nd Mach., vii, 27, 28.) It was only when the 
mother died before the child was old enough to be weaned, or 
when she was unable to rear it herself, that nurses were em- 
ployed : but at a later age matrons often thought themselves too 
infirm for the duty of suckling their children, and the office 
therefore was transferred to nurses, who were reckoned among 
the principal persons of the family ; wherefore they are also 
mentioned in sacred history. (Gen., xxxv, 8; 4th Kings, xi, 2 ; 
2nd Paral., xxii, 11.) The male children remained until the 
fifth year under the care of the women ; they were then trans- 
ferred to the father's care, who most frequently taught them 
that business or occupation which he himself practised; nor did 
he omit to teach them religion — instructing them in the law of 
Moses. (Deut., vi, 20-25 ; vii, 19 ; xi, 19.) Those who wished 
to have their sons more fully instructed, unless they had slaves 
capable of communicating such instruction, sent them to some 
priest or Levite, who sometimes would have even several scholars 
under his tuition : for, from 1st Kings, (i, 24-28,) we see that 
near to the holy Tabernacle a school was set apart for the educa- 
tion of youth ; of which kind there had been several others 
before Samuel's time, which this prophet afterwards restored. 
From the time of Samuel, the disciples— called the children of 
the prophets — appear in Jewish history. But schools such as 
ours, for general instruction, do not appear to have existed among 
the Hebrews before the destruction of their nation or kingdom 
by the Romans ; the schools of which we have spoken above 
being intended for the religious education of the youth. The 
daughters remained always under the care of the women in the 



480 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY 



apartments of the house appropriated to the females, unless when 
they went out with a pitcher to draw water ; an office which in 
the times of simplicity of manners, and at all times in the 
humble ranks of life, was performed by the women. (Exod., ii, 
16; Gen., xxiv, 16; xxix, 10; 1st Kings, ix, 11, 12.) They 
learned there those domestic arts, and acquired that knowledge, 
which, according to the customs of the time, was looked upon 
as befitting the female character and situation in life, until they 
were sold, or, by a better fortune, given away to some one in 
marriage. (Prov., xxxi, 13 ; 2nd Kings, xiii, 1.) It is easy to 
understand how the lot of her who was given away in marriage 
was better than of her who was sold ; as in the latter case the 
wife was often looked upon by the husband somewhat in the 
light of a slave purchased by his money. The daughters of the 
rich lived in their palaces — in the house or apartments of the 
women — seldom appearing in public. 

Of the Paternal Authority. — The father's authority extended 
not only to his wives, his children, his slaves of both "sexes, and 
their children, but also to the children of his sons ; for, the mar- 
ried sons anciently dwelt in the house of their father ; unless they 
had got for wife one, who, not having a brother, possessed an in- 
heritance of her own : or unless by means of some trade or business 
they had acquired enough to support their own family. This 
authority of the father was absolute, and extended even to the 
infliction of the last punishment ; in other words, it was a power 
of life and death, (Gen., xxi, 14; xxxviii, 24); which was so 
restricted by the law of Moses that the father, if he judged his 
son deserving of death should bring him before the judge ; who, 
at the same time, was bound to pass sentence of death upon him 
if convicted of having addressed injurious language to, or of 
having beaten his father or mother ; or if convicted of being a 
person of dissipated habits beyond the hope of correction. (Exod. , 
xxi, 15-17; Levit., xx, 9; Deut., xxi, 18-21.) Moreover, the 
paternal authority was consecrated by the fundamental laws of 
the Mosaic dispensation, (Exod., xx, 12;) and only ended with 
the death of the father. By the command of the law children 
were not only bound to honour their parents internally and by 
words, but also to assist them in their wants, and to contribute 
as far as they could towards their support. (Matt., xv, 5, 6 ; 
Mark, vii, 11-13.) As to the rest, the Hebrews had anciently 
the greatest respect for the paternal authority, and the blessing 
even of the parents was considered an inestimable advantage, 
and their malediction a real misfortune. (Gen., ix, 27 ; xlix, 2- 
28; Exod., xx, 12.) 

Of the last Will or Testament. — When the father died the 



AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



481 



sons obtained their means of support from the inheritance which 
was commonly divided into equal shares, the first-born son 
alone taking a double portion. The father declared his last 
will before witnesses, and probably also in the presence of the 
heirs, (4th Kings, xx, 1) ; at a more recent period written testa- 
ments were introduced. The sons of the concubines, that is, of 
the wives of the second class, were left to the good pleasure of 
the father : we find that Abraham before his death, by means of 
gifts, made provision not only for Ismael, but also for his sons 
by Cetura : Jacob made the sons of the inferior wives also his 
heirs. (Gen., xxi, 8-21 ; xxv, 1-6 xlix, i, 27.) The law of 
Moses did not restrain the will or pleasure of the father in this 
matter of providing for the sons of the inferior wives ; since we 
find even Jephte, who was the son of a harlot, complaining that 
he was driven from his father's house without an inheritance. 
(Judg., xi, 1-7.) Daughters not only did not inherit, but they 
themselves even, if they were unmarried, belonged to the inheri- 
tance, and were sold in marriage by their brothers. It was only 
when they had no brother that the inheritance fell to the 
daughters. (]S T umb.,xx vii, 2-8. ) If a father died without leaving 
children, his property passed to the nearest relatives, according 
to the disposition of the Mosaic law. (Xumb., xx, 1-11; xxxi, 
1-10.) Widows could not enter on the possession of the family 
property at the death of their husbands. Hence, unless it had 
been otherwise provided in the will, their support fell upon their 
sons or relatives. Properly speaking, it was the duty of the 
heirs of the husbands to support their widows ; but this duty 
was at times so badly perlormed, either through want of means, 
or want of inclination, that we read of widows having returned 
to their father's house, (Gen., xxxviii, 11 ; Ruth, i, 8) : and we ' 
find the prophets inveighing forcibly against the abandonment of 
the widows, whom they so often place in the same rank with 
orphans. 

Of the Slaves. — Slavery, which we find existing before the 
deluge, (Gen., ix, 25,) added much to the importance of domes- 
tic society, as it erected the family into a kind of petty 
sovereignty. And, indeed, we find some of the heads of the 
patriarchal families, like the rich Greeks and Romans afterwards, 
supporting a vast number of slaves, who obeyed them as sub- 
jects. The Hebrews were permitted to have slaves of both 
sexes, and these might be Hebrews or Gentiles ; but, if Gentiles, 
they should submit to circumcision and abandon idolatry. (Gen., 
xvii, 13-17.) The Chanaanites were an exception to this rule: 
these it was not allowable to keep as slaves, as by their numbers, 
as well as by their proneness to idolatry, and their character 

2 I 



4S2 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY 



for bad faith, they would have proved an occasion of ruin to the 
Hebrews. The inhabitants of Gabaon, of Caphira, of Beroth, 
and of Cariathiarirm having, by a stratagem, induced Josue to 
make a league of peace with them, they were reduced to slavery, 
and attached to the service of the temple. (Jos., ix, 1-27.) 

Of the ways by which one became a Slave. — We can only hazard 
conjectures as to the first origin of slavery, but the following are 
the several ways by which one became a slave : first, by being 
taken captive in war, which, by many, is supposed to have been 
the first origin of slavery. (Dent., xx, 14; xxi, 10, 11; Gen. 
xiv.) Second, on account of debts which the debtor was unable 
to pay. (4th Kings, iv, 1 ; Jerem., 1, 1 ; Matt., xviii, 25.) 
Third, in consequence of theft, for the reparation of which the 
means of the thief did not suffice. (2nd Esdras, v, 4, 5.) 
Fourth, by being stolen : this case would occur when a free 
man would be carried off in a time of peace, and reduced to 
slavery, or sold. Such an act of injustice was called in the 
Roman law plagii crimen. This crime, when committed against 
a Hebrew, was punished by the law of Moses with death. 
(Deut., xxiv, 7.) Filth, by birth, when persons were born of 
one's married slaves; these are termed bom in the house, .home- 
lorn, and the sons or children of the handmaid. (Gen., xvi. ; 14 ; 
xvi., 3, &c.) Sixth, by sale, either when a freeman, pressed by 
poverty, sold himself as a slave, or when a master sold his slave 
to another; and this we might almost term the usual mode of 
acquiring slaves ; hence, slaves are called the purchased with 
money. Although the law had determined that the mean price 
of a slave should be thirty sides of silver, (Exod., xxi, 32); 
yet, in particular cases, when there would be question of buying 
a slave, the price would be affected by the' constitution, capa- 
bility, sex, age, &e., of the person. 

Condition of Slaves among tie Hebrews. — The slaves could 
neither acquire anything with the right of proprietorship, nor 
possess anything with such right. All the fruits of their labour 
went to their master : who, in return, should provide for all their 
wants. Since a great number of slaves was a source of such 
profit to the possessor, it became the interest of masters to in- 
duce their slaves to marry ; tor the fruit of their marriage be- 
longed of right to their master. These children, being brought 
up in his house,, had a filial regard for him ; and we find the 
patriarchs counting so much on the fidelity of their slaves as 
to instruct them with arms. Their most ordinary occupations 
were the labours of the field, and the care of the flocks. Some 
one of them, distinguished tor his fidelity and capacity, was in- 
trusted with the superintendence of the rest; he assigned to 



AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



483 



them their several tasks, and distributed to them their food, 
unless the mother of the family reserved this latter care to her- 
self. Sometimes certain slaves were charged with the education 
or care of the sons of their master, and some were more particu- 
larly attached to his own person, in the same way as some of the 
female slaves were employed in attending upon his wives ; and 
sometimes also the master would select a wife of the second 
order from among his slaves. JNo where were slaves treated with 
such humanity as among the Hebrews. At first, the virtue and 
generous character of the patriarchs rendered their authority not 
only supportable, but even agreeable, and afterwards Moses pro- 
vided so carefully for the interests of the slaves in his enact- 
ments as to render it almost impossible for ill-disposed masters 
to abuse their power. Thus the law made it a duty for tbem 
to treat their slaves with the greatest possible humanitv. If a 
master killed one of his slaves he was to be treated as a mur- 
derer, and to sutler the extreme punishment. (Exodus, xxi, 
20.) In this way has the Hebrew text, in this place, been 
always understood by the Jewish doctors. If, however, the 
slave survived his wounds for a day or two, the master was to 
go unpunished ; because in this case no intention of murder was 
to be presumed, seeing that such intention would be so much 
opposed to the master's own interest ; and in such case the loss 
of the slave was deemed a sufficient punishment. (Exod., 
xx, 21.) Those who had lost an eye or a tooth by the brutality 
of their master, became entitled to their freedom in consequence. 
All slaves were to rest from labour on the Sabbath and on the 
great festivals. (Exod., xx, 10; Deut., v. 14.) They were 
to be invited to the feasts, which were provided out of the second 
tithes. (Deut., xii, 17, 18.) The slaves could freely eat at all 
times of the fruits which they were employed to gather, or of 
the food which they were preparing. Moreover, the master was 
bound to provide for the marriage of his female slaves, unless he 
preferred taking them to himself as wives, or giving them to his 
sons. When the slaves were of Hebrew origin, they could not 
be detained in servitude beyond six years. At the seventh 
year the master was bound to send them away free with a gift 
which would enable them to provide for their most pressing 
necessities when entering upon their free state of life. If a 
slave was married to one of the female slaves of fiis master, the 
wife did not obtain her liberty along with the husband, unless 
her six years of servitude were also complete. It often happened 
that a slave, through attachment to his master, or attachment 
to his own wife or family, whose emancipation had not yet c$me 
round, refused to receive his freedom. In this case the law, 



484 



OF DOMESTIC SOCIETY AM OXG THE HEBKEWS. 



wishing that it should be evident that this man voluntarily re- 
mained a slave, required that his refusal to avail himself of the 
liberty to which he had a right, should be repeated in the presence 
of the judge. This renunciation having thus acquired due pub- 
licity, his ears were bored with an awl against the doorpost of 
his master's house, in token of perpetual servitude (Exod. xxi, 
5, 6) : but not even these slaves could be sold to strangers out- 
side of the Hebrew territory. (Exod., xxi, 7, 8.) If a Hebrew, 
compelled by poverty, had sold himself as a slave to a stranger 
who dwelt within the Hebrew territory, he could not be detained 
in bondage beyond the next year of jubilee; and at any time 
the relative of such slave, or any other person, or the slave 
himself if he had the means, could purchase his redemption on 
the condition of making compensation to the master for the 
time that was to elapse before the arrival of the year of jubilee. 
Hence the price of redemption in such case would be greater or 
less, according as the year of jubilee was remote or near. (Levit., 
xxv, 47 — on.) This same passage in Leviticus also proves that 
slaves sometimes possessed property of their own — either through 
the kindness of their master, or because of the gift which a 
former master had given to them when leaving him ; for the 
law here in Leviticus (xxv. 49,) supposes the case of a slave 
being able to purchase his freedom with his own money. Accord- 
ing to the Mosaic law, moreover, it was provided that in the 
year of the jubilee all slaves of Hebrew origin should be set free. 
(Lev. xxv, 39, 41.) As for those who, renouncing their right 
in the sabbatical year, had got their ears bored in token of 
perpetual servitude, it is a question with commentators whether 
they also obtained their freedom in the year of jubilee. Calmet, 
in his commentary on Deut., (xv, 17,) says, that because the 
words of the text are for ever, some think that these slaves 
were bound tor their whole life, but that several commentators, 
after the rabbins, explain the text of a long servitude, that is, 
until the year of the jubilee. Lastly, if a slave of another 
nation fled to the Hebrews, he was to be received hospitably, 
and on no account to be given up to his master. (Dent, xxiii, 
16, 17.) ' ' 

Condition of Slaves in the other Xations. — Notwithstanding 
that the humane laws of Ifoses regarding slaves were sometimes 
disregarded in practice, (Jerem.*, xxxiv, 8, 22,) still it is beyond 
question that the Hebrew slaves were better off than was that 
class in the other nations, particularly among the Greeks and 
Romans. Nor is this wonderful, when we consider that the 
Hebrews were excited to the performance of acts of kindness 
towards their slaves by weighty motives of religion, which were 



OF THE SOCIAL MANNERS, ETC. 



485 



wanting to the other nations, among whom there was no rest for 
the slaves — no protection of the laws — and constant liability to 
the most atrocious punishments. Those who evinced a disposition 
to run away, or were suspected of it, were often branded on the 
forehead. They were not admitted to the festivals or exercises 
of religion ; their right to contract a regular marriage was but 
seldom recognised ; their savings were under the control of the 
master, and out of them they were obliged to make presents to 
the master. Even the slave who obtained his liberty had a name 
fixed upon him — lroQos among the Greeks, libertus among the 
Romans — by which the memory of his former degraded state 
would be perpetuated ; not only that, but even the children of 
the libertus were distinguished by the name of libertini. These 
general statements, after all, can give no tdea of the sufferings of 
the slaves from the brutality of masters who had no law to 
restrain them. Miserable, therefore, was the condition of the 
slave, and great was the prerogative of that free birth and free 
state which constituted the ingenuus. In the Xew Testament we 
find many illustrations taken from the state of slavery, which the 
few observations that we have here made on the subject will 
enable us the better to understand. 



CHAPTER X. 

OF THE SOCIAL MANNERS AND TOLITE USAGES OF THE 
HEBREWS. 

First — General character of the Hebrew Nation, as indicated in the 
virtues and vices which their history exhibits. Amidst the people 
of the East the Hebrew character stands out in relief, as distin- 
guished for virtues and vices of its own. jS^o doubt, if this 
people had profited of the advantages which it enjoyed from Goa 
above the nations of the earth, its history would have been a 
record of a far different kind from what it is ; but the Hebrews, 
as a body, often turned a deaf ear to their guides, and plunged 
headlong into the idolatry and other vices of the surrounding 
nations. At the same time, it is not less certain that at several 
periods of their history we behold them simple in their manners, 
moderate in prosperity, admirable for their religious faith, full 
of sincerity, faithful to their word, remarkable for their hu- 
manity, their justice, and the mildness of their character. And 
at every period many were to be found, like the ancient 
patriarchs, remarkable for the integrity of their conduct, passing 



486 



OF THE SOCIAL ZtfAXXEKS AND 



their clays in the simple pursuits of the pastoral or agricultural 
life. Aud upon occasions this people knew how to display the 
most heroic valour, whether in avenging injuries or defending 
their independence. "We may refer to the epochs of David and 
the Machabees, and to others besides, in confirmation of this 
assertion. 

"We have already said that, on viewing the history of the 
Hebrews, we often find the body of the nation infected with the 
vices of their Gentile neighbours ; but the vices which reigned 
most extensively among them — which were, in a certain manner, 
their characteristic vices, were indocility and obstinacy ; to 
which we may add a proneness to idolatry, up to the moment of 
the Babylonian captivity. Here the tendency to idolatry 
ceased. If, afterwards, in the time of the Machabees, very many, 
even of the Jews, yielding to persecution, fell into idolatry, still 
the better part of the nation remained free from that vice. In 
fine, to judge properly of the character of the Hebrews, we must 
not study it in the latter period of their commonwealth, when 
the evil example and perverse traditions of their doctors had to a 
great extent extinguished, if we may so speak, the spirit of the 
Mosaic laws, although their letter still remained. It was then 
that the bulk of the nation truly merited the disreputable 
character which both sacred and profane writers give us of them. 
(1st Thess., ii, 15; Tacit., Hist., lib. 5, cap. 5.) 

Second. — Of Politeness, or Elegance of Manners among the 
Hebrews. The Hebrews were exceedingly polite in all their 
domestic and social relations. Of this, as Jahn observes, (Archce. 
Bill.,) the Bible furnishes so many proofs that one would be 
rather disposed to find fault with an excess than with a deficiency 
in this matter of politeness and civility. This subject was not 
overlooked in the law of Moses : thus, we read in Leviticus, 
(xix, 32,) c< Rise up before the hoary head, and honour the 
person of the aged man : and fear the Lord thy God. I am the 
Lord." But to appreciate properly the urbane manners of this 
people, we must not compare them with our usages — the cere- 
monial of countries and of peoples being almost as varied as their 
customs and language. Thus, we are to '.remember that exagge- 
ration is one of the distinctive marks of Oriental civilization, 
and therefore we are not to take to the letter their expressions, 
any more than we are to interpret their postures and gestures 
as conveying ail that profound respect which would appear to 
be their natural meaning. If we examine the forms of salutation 
and expressions of civility which prevail among ourselves, we 
shall discover a high tone of exaggeration pervading all these : 
and in all countries those modes of address and politeness, through 



TOLITE USAGES OP THE HEBREWS. 



487 



constant use and frequency of repetition, soon degenerate into 
mere verbal forms. The Easterns have remained faithful, even 
to the present day, to the rules of civility which we see observed 
in Genesis, and which are also handed down by Herodotus and 
the other ancient writers. And it is principally on this point 
that we can say of this people in general what Shaw affirms of 
the Bedouins in particular — " that they retain a great many of 
those manners and customs which we read of in sacred as well as 
profane history ; and that, if we except their religion, they are 
the very same people they were two or three thousand years 
ago." (Shaw's Travels in Barbary and the Levant, apud me, vol. 

I, p. 426.) 

Third. — Of Presents. In the East, presents have always been 
one of the most powerful bonds of social relations : sometimes they 
are the homage of respect — a mark of honour ; sometimes they 
are a tribute of friendship. This custom of making presents, 
which goes back to the most remote antiquity, and which gives 
so favourable an idea of primitive manners, was always faithfully 
observed among the Hebrews, as we can easilv collect from their 
history. (Gen., xxxiii ; xlv, 21-23; 1st Kings, ix, 7; 3rd 
Kings, xiv, 2, 3 ; 4th Kings, v, 42 ; viii, 8, 9 ; comp. Matt., ii, 

II. ) On visiting a prince, it was usual to offer some gift to 
him ; and the sacrifices prescribed in the law held the place of 
the gifts which the Hebrews should offer to their great King, 
Jehovah. (Deut., xvi, 16, 17.) Kings themselves sent presents 
mutually to one another, as they also did to other persons whom 
they wished to honour. This latter sort of gift is almost always 
designated in the Hebrew by the term JHD, (matins) or in the 
feminine form nils (matt ana). The ancient prophets did not 
ordinarily refuse the presents which were offered to them ; but 
when the false prophets began to receive gifts as a tribute from 
those whom they flattered and deceived, the true prophets would 
no longer receive the like. As to the gifts which had for object 
to corrupt the judges, these are termed in the Hebrew inw, 
(shochad,) and are not to be confounded with the former of which 
we have spoken ; but were regarded as infamous at all times. 
The value of the gift was proportioned to the means of him who 
offered it, rather than to the condition of the person who received 
it ; for, in this matter, regard was had chief! y to the good- will 
of the offerer. The poor offered to those of high rank the most 
simple things ; sometimes, for example, a mess of the most ordi- 
nary kind of food. These simple things were not intended so 
much for the great ones themselves as for their servants and 
attendants. (1st Kings, xxv, 27.) The matter of the gifts was 
in general everything that could be useful — gold, silver, garments, 



488 



OF THE SOCIAL ]tfAXXEES A^ T D 



various kinds of vessels, arms, food, &c. ; but kings and persons 
of exalted rank seldom offered anything but garments to those 
whom they wished to honour, such as their ministers, ambas- 
sadors, distinguished foreigners, learned men, &c, (Gen. xlv, 
22, 23 ; Dan., xvi, 29 ; Esth., viii, 15) ; and in the king's palace 
there was an apartment specially set aside for the keeping of 
these garments. The highest mark of esteem which a king could 
give any one was to take off his own robe and present it to him. 
The modern princes of the East frequently make presents of 
this kind ; and it is a duty for him who receives such to put it 
on immediately, and to pay homage to the prince who has given 
or sent it to him. Formerly kings often made these presents of 
garments to their guests immediately before their proceeding to 
the banquet-room. (Gem, xlv, 23 ; 4th Kings, x, 22 ; Apoc, iii, 
5 ; comp. Homer, Iliad, book 24, line 226, 227.) To this day 
in the East, when gifts are brought to kings and chiefs, they are 
carried by men and beasts of burthen, with remarkable pomp ; 
and each gift, be its weight ever so little, is borne by a man 
with both his hands, or even by a beast of burthen. (Judg., iii, 
18; 4th Kings, viii, 9.) 

Eourth. — Of Conversation — Bathing — the Noonday Nap. 
Among the Easterns of ancient times, visits to each other were 
almost as rare as they are among the modern people of Asia. 
When they wished to pass away the time together they generally 
met at the entrance of the city on some shady spot, furnished 
with seats, and exclusively set apart for these meetings of friends 
or neighbours. The cities of Mauritania are still provided with 
places of this kind. Thither resorted all the idle persons of the 
city that they might see those who were going and coming, and 
that they might inspect the commercial transactions and hear the 
trials, for the markets and the tribunals of justice were also 
near the city gates. Conversation was not a passion with them ; 
however, it is certain that their character was far removed from 
the taciturnity of the modern Asiatics. The Easterns always 
show themselves full of deference for those with whom they 
converse. Contradiction is almost unknown among them ; and 
when they perceive even that a person is imposing upon them, 
they hardly venture to make the least objection to what he 
says. It suffices, it is enough, are their strongest terms to express 
disapprobation. A name of the most injurious import among 
them when addressed to any one, was nabal, or fool ; but this 
term, in their mind, conveyed the signification of an impious, 
wicked person. J^othing was further removed from flattery, or 
more noble than their manner of testifying their approval of 
what was said : thou hast said it, or, thou hast spoken well. 



POLITE USAGES OP THE HEBREWS. 



489 



Travellers testify that this manner of expressing assent is still 
preserved in the Libanus. (See Aryda, cited by J arm.) 

As for bathing, it was almost a necessity for the people of 
Palestine, on account of the heat of the climate ; and we see 
that the bath has been at all times in use among the Hebrews. 
The use of the bath was sometimes even a matter of obligation 
according to the law of Closes. (Lev., xiv, 2 ; xv, 1-8 ; xvii, 
15, 16 ; xxii, 6 ; jSumb., xix, 6.) Whence we are to conclude, 
that from the time of Moses, at least, public baths were estab- 
lished in Palestine, such as are to be seen at the present day 
throughout the entire East. 

To take a nap at noonday, is, for the Easterns, it is well 
known, almost as favourite a practice as the use of the baths. 
Now, this practice, in like manner, existed among the Hebrews : 
we have the proof of it in the scripture. (2nd Kings, iv, 4 ; xi, 2 ; 
compare Matt., xiii, 25.) 

Fifth. — Treatment of the Poor and of the Beggars. — Jahn and 
some others say that although Moses made abundant provision 
f or the poor, yet that it does not appear that he has said any- 
thing respecting beggars ; and that the first express notice of 
mendicants occurs in the Psalms. (See Psalm xxxvi — in the 
Hebrew, xxxvii, 25; and Psalm cviii — in the Hebrew, cix, 10.) 
All admit that in the times subsequent to the writing of the 
Psalms beggars were to be found in Palestine ; and indeed 
Glaire shows very clearly, {Introduet., torn. 2, p. 463,) that 
there is no reason for asserting that they did not exist there even 
from the time of Moses. In the time of our Redeemer, when the 
beggars appear to have been very numerous, they sat in the 
public places, at the doors of the rich, at the gates of the temple, 
and very probably also at the doors of the synagogues. (Mark, 
x, 46 ; Luke, xvi, 20 ; Acts, iii, 2.) Sometimes food was given to 
them, sometimes also money. (Matt., xxvi, 9 ; Mark, x, 6 ; 
Luke, xxvi, 21.) It does not appear that they had then 
begun to beg from door to door, as they do now in the East — 
although less frequently than in Europe. Jahn remarks that 
the custom of seeking alms by sounding a trumpet or horn, 
which is observed by the Mahometan monks called kalendar or 
l-arendal, was in use in our Redeemer's time ; as the text of St. 
Matthew (vi, 2,) shows where sat-icr^ occurs in the htphil 
or causative sense, in the same way as several other words in the 
JSew Testament are found in this sense. (See 1st Cor., i, 20; 
iii, 6 ; viii, 3 ; xv, 1, &c.) It is remarkable that the Easterns 
so frequently give to mercy, or almsgiving, the name of justice : 
of this Jahn points out several examples in the scripture. But 
he ought to have observed at the sametime, that in the scripture 



490 



OF THE SOCIAL MANNERS AND 



the name justice is given not only to the special virtue of justice, 
but frequently also to virtue in general — righteousness. 

Sixth. — Treatment of Strangers — Hospitality. One of the 
duties which Moses recommends to the Hebrews with the 
greatest care, and by the most powerful reasons, is kindness to- 
wards the stranger. In the Book of Genesis he places before them 
affecting examples of the exercise of this virtue ; and for a people 
who had been themselves so long strangers in another land, it 
was not a difficult matter to comprehend the importance of this 
duty. The law distinguishes two kinds or classes of strangers : 
one class consisted of those who, whether foreigners or Hebrews, 
had no fixed habitation of their own ; the other consisted of 
people from other lands who had a dwelling of their own in 
Palestine ; but the law prescribed the same kind offices towards 
both — not only protecting them in their interests, but even 
manifesting a solicitude for their well-being. (See Levit., xix, 
10; Deut. xxiv, 19-21.) What a rare example for those times 
of humanity to the stranger ! Hence, in the early times of the 
Hebrew state, as long as the people acted in conformity with 
the law, strangers were well off among them. It is true that 
David and Solomon employed them in certain public works, but 
in doing so they only carried out, in the mildest way, the 
common law of that period. Unfortunately at a later period of 
the Jewish commonwealth, the people fell away greatly from 
the spirit of their legislator ; and in the time of Christ, many 
of them had gone so far as to restrict the meaning of neighbour 

{reang) to their friends, in such a way as to exclude strangers 
from those offices of kindness and humanity which were so 
clearly inculcated in the law. 

Hospitality has been always practised among the Easterns in 
a remarkable degree. That of the Arabs in particular has be- 
come a proverb. Mebuhr says (Descrip. de L' Arable, p. 1, 
chap, ii, p. 67,) " From the most remote period the hospitality 
of the Arabs has been praised, and I believe that those of the 
present day are not less distinguished for this virtue than were 
their ancestors." Shaw, in his observations on the kingdoms of 
Algiers and Tunis, renders the same justice to this people on 
their manner of treating strangers: he says, — "The greatest 
prince is not ashamed to fetch a lamb from his herd and kill it, 
whilst the princess, his wife, is impatient till she has prepared 
her fire and her kettle to seeth, and dress it. The custom that 
still continues of walking either barefoot or with slippers, re- 
quires the ancient compliment of bringing water upon the arrival 
of a stranger to wash his feet. And who is the person that pre- 
sents himself first to this office, and to give the mar-habbah or 



POLITE USAGE OF THE HEBREWS. 



491 



welcome but the master himself of the family ? 'Who always 
distinguishes himself by being the most officious ; and after his 
entertainment is prepared, accounts it a breach of respect to sit 
down with his guests, but stands up all the time and serves 
them." (Shaw's Travels, vol. 1, p. 427-29, apud me.) This 
traveller, indeed, whilst describing the reception given to himself 
by the Arabians, places before us a lively representation of the 
hospitality which Abraham in the ancient times exercised 
towards the three heavenly guests whom he brought into his 
tent. (Gen., xviii, 8.) It is still a constant usage in the East 
not to put questions to strangers — about their journey, &c. — be- 
fore they have taken some refreshment ; and the place in which 
they find a reception becomes for them a sacred asylum, which 
the owner is bound to defend against every attack ; for to give 
this security to the guests whom one receives is one of the most 
stringent duties of hospitality. (Gen.,xix, 3-8 ; Judg., xix, 16-24.) 
Neither in ancient nor in modern times have there been in the 
East inns in which travellers might find lodging and refresh- 
ment. Shade from the sun, and protection from the plunderers 
of the night, is all that the caravansaries afford ; and in the 
ancient times these caravansaries were but few. Hence, unless 
a traveller found some private person to take him in, he was 
. often obliged to spend the night under the open air in the streets, 
a thing which in warm countries is by no means uncommon. 
But distinguished persons made it a practice to show to those 
benighted strangers the kindness of offering them a lodging in 
their own houses. Thus acted Abraham and Lot. And the 
sacred writers recommend most pressingly this act of hospitality, 
on which St. Paul insists in so particular a manner in his Epistle 
to the Hebrews, (xiii, 2,) where he recommends this kindness to 
strangers by the consideration that some hosts have had the 
honour to exercise their hospitality towards angels without know- 
ing it. To icash the feet of strangers being, as we have seen above, 
one of the essential duties of hospitality, this expression came to 
be used to designate hospitality. (1 Tim", v, 10.) 

Seventh. —Forms of Salutation. The form of saluting both 
at meeting and taking leave, was a kind of blessing ; and it is 
for this reason that to bless is often taken in the sense of to salute — 
to bid adieu. Thus, be thou blessed by the Lord — the benediction 
of God be upon thee — God be with thee, or assist thee, were very 
usual forms of salutation ; but that which was most common was, 
peace be to thee. (Ruth, ii, 4 ; Judg., xix, 20 ; 1st Kings, xxv, 
6 ; 2nd Kings, xx, 9.) In this last formula the term peace 
signifies every kind of prosperity. The Phoenician salutation e 
lice happily, my Lord ! was only used by the Hebrews inaddres- 



492 



OF THE SOCIAL MAX^EKS, ETC. 



sing their kings. (The ordinary salutation of the Greeks was 
y^cups] that of the Eomans salve, or ave.) The gestures of the 
body were different, according to the dignity of the person who 
was saluted, as one may still observe among the Easterns. The 
ceremony by which those forms of salutation are accompanied at 
the present day in the East is, to place the right hand on the left 
breast and bow the head with studied gravity. This is observed 
on every occasion of saluting. Eut if the Arabians salute a friend, 
each extends his right hand towards the other, and rises it up 
as if presenting it to the other to be kissed ; then, withdrawing 
the hands, each kisses his own hand and immediately places it 
on his forehead : if one of the two be of a higher rank, he per- 
mits the other to kiss his hand. In saluting, one may also kiss 
the beard of his friend : and this is the only case in which any 
one permits his beard to be touched by another. (2nd Kings, 
xx, 9.) These practices in saluting exactly agree with the 
customs of the Hebrews, who sometimes also kissed each other 
on the cheek. Like the Hebrews, the Arabians of the present 
day inquire regarding the health of their friend, thank God for 
having met him, and repeat over and over again their gestures 
and forms of salutation. It was on account of this lengthened 
ceremonial in saluting that messengers charged with any urgent 
commission were forbidden to salute any one on the way. (4th 
Kings, iv, 29 ; Luke, x, 4.) The modern Orientals never meet 
a great man without bowing down almost to the earth before 
him ; they embrace his knees, or kiss the extremity of his robe, 
with which they then touch their forehead. To a prince or a 
king they prostrate themselves with the whole body on the 
earth, or, at least, they bend the knees and kiss, sometimes the 
ground, sometimes the feet of the person saluted. This is but 
a repetition of what the Hebrews did, as the very language of 
this people attests, for they have different terms to express : to 
bow the head, to make a profound inclination of the body, to bend 
the knees, to prostrate one's-self, to cast one' s- self with his face on 
the earth. 

Eighth. — Of Visiting. In the East the paying of visits is 
marked with a considerable degree of solemnity. When the 
visitor arrives at the house of his friend, or of the person whom 
he wishes to visit, he, in the first place, before entering, an- 
nounces his arrival by calling to the master of the house, or 
knocking at the door. He then waits for a considerable interval 
whilst preparations are being made for his reception, and the 
women betake themselves to their own apartments. This custom 
of knocking and waiting at the door or gate, was observed by 



OF THE G.AMES AND AMUSE STENTS, ETC., 



493 



the Hebrews as several passages of the scripture testify. (4th. 
Kings, v, 9; Matt, yii, 7; Acts x, 17, 18.) 

When there is question in the East of visiting a person of 
exalted rank, etiquette requires that the visitor should be an- 
nounced beforehand, and an audience obtained for him ; and, 
moreover, that presents should be brought, in this case to him 
who is visited. The audience once obtained, the visitor is re- 
ceived with great pomp, precious ointment is poured upon his 
head, and all possible marks of honour are lavished upon him. 
(Memoires D. Arvieux, torn. 3, pages 219, 324-318.) The 
circumstances of this solemn reception are supposed to be fre- 
quently alluded to in scripture. 

Xinth. — Of Public Honours. The Easterns are magnificent 
in their exhibitions of honour towards a king, prince, or ambas- 
sador, on the occasion of his solemn entrance into a city. The 
concourse of people is immense : those windows, few in number, 
which look into the street, and which are kept closed at all other 
times, are now opened ; and they, as well as the flat roofs of 
the houses, are filled with spectators : the streets, to guard 
against inconvenience from the dust, are watered, and are strewn 
with flowers, leaves of trees, and covered with carpeting. The 
spectators clap their hands, and shouts of joy resound on all 
sides ; whereas upon all other occasions the king is saluted in 
silence. (2nd Kings, xvi, 15; 3rd Kings, i, 40; 4th Kings, ix, 
13; Isai., lxii, 11 ; Zach., ix, 9 ; Matt, xxi, 7-8.) In the order 
of the procession which is formed on such occasions to do honour 
to a royal personage, the first place is assigned to a company of 
musicians ; these are followed by the ministers and great digni- 
taries of state, then by the servants of the king's house, and 
lastly by the monarch himself, all mounted on horses richly 
caparisoned. In the ancient times, on such occasions, kings rode 
in beautifully ornamented chaiiots. ((ien., xli, 43; 2nd Kings, 
xv, 1 ; 3rd Kings, xv.) 

CHAPTER XI. 

OF THE GAMES AND AMUSEMENTS TO WHICH ALLUSION IS MALE 
IX THE SCRIPTURE. 

The Hebrew character was always remarkable for a certain 
gravity, which rendered the games and amusements of other 
nations to a great degree unattractive to that people. It is not 
wonderful, then, that the scripture should contain no allusion to 
any particular kind of amusement which could be said to be of 
Hebrew origin. It is likely that the Hebrew of mature years 
sought his principal relaxation in the rest and quiet of the 



494 



OF THE GAilT.S AND A3irSE^I"EXTS TO WHICH 



Sabbath and the festivals, or in conversation with some 
neighbour at the city gates, or on the flat house-top. ITore 
active amusements, however, are so natural to the yonng, and 
particularly to children, that there is no nation of which the 
ancient historv has come down to ns without containing some 
traces of such amusements. That those childish sports were 
indulged in bv the Hebrew children, particularly of the cities, 
is proved by more than one scriptural allusion. (See Jerem., 
xxx. 19; Zach., viii, 5:) the words of Zacharias are : "And 
the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls, playing in 
the streets thereof." In the gospel according to St. Matthew, 
our Redeemer takes a comparison from an amusement practised 
by boys in the market-place : " But whereunto shall I esteem 
this o-eneration to be like ? It is like to children sitting in the 
market-place, who, crying to their companions, say : 4i AVe have 
piped to vou. and you have not danced: We have lamented, 
and you have not mourned." (Matt., xi, 16, 17.) From these 
words it would seem that the amusement consisted in mimicking 
the scenes of common life : from which they sometimes selected 
a gay. and sometimes a doleful incident. 

Although music and singing are mentioned in Scripture, 
principally in connexion with the worship of God, yet we need 
have no doubt but they entered largely at all times into the 
recreations of the young. 

After the captivity Grecian influence made the Hebrews 
acquainted with those theatrical exhibitions and public games 
tor which Greece was so famous. Nothing appears to have been, 
naturally, more foreign to the customs of the Hebrews than 
theatres! public games, and those gymnasia in which naked men 
contended at the risk of life, that the multitude might enjoy the 
spectacle. But since the scripture of the ]Xew Testament con- 
tains many comparisons taken from these things, it will not appear 
out of place to speak here briefly of these Gentile usages, in order 
that the meaning of such comparisons in the scripture may be 
more fully understood. 

We must first observe, that among the Greeks and Koreans 
places were set apart for practising the public games. These 
places were called theatres. They were of such a form that the 
whole multitude could see the games. As the Gentiles relished 
these sights exceedingly, hence theatres were numerous — and 
even in Judea, from the time that it had become subject to 
foreign princes. We see in the Acts of the Apostles (xix, 29,) 
that the companions of St. Paul, at Ephesus were dragged to the 
theatre, but that he was prevented by his friends from appearing 
in the same place with the view of quelling the excited multi- 



ALLUSION IS MADE m THE SCRIPTURE. 



495 



tude. In the first Epistle to the Corinthians, (iv, 9,) where we 
read in our English version : "For I think God hath set forth 
us apostles, the last, as it were men appointed to death : we are 
made a spectacle to the world, and to angels, and to men." Here 
the word which is rendered spectacle is in Greek fcargov. It is 
properly rendered as we have it, because the word here does not 
signify the place of the exhibition, but the thing exhibited. 
Some have observed here, moreover, that the apostle alludes to 
those who, being condemned to fight with wild 'beasts, were 
brought to the theatre the last in the day's exhibition ; because 
to these no arms were allowed to defend themselves, but they 
were exposed quite naked to the fury of the beasts, so that they 
might well be called ewiQumtioi, morti destinati, appointed to 
death. We read again in the Epistle to the Hebrews, (x, 33,) 
" By reproaches and tribulations (you) were made a gazing 
stock" — in the Greek feargifyfitvot — like persons exposed in a 
theatre — like the condemned criminals, who were brought for- 
ward to fight with wild beasts for the amusement of the 
assembled multitudes. 

A theatre is so called from seeing, and in general signifies a 
place for witnessing any public exhibition. Among us at present 
it signifies a place for dramatic performances — tragedies and 
comedies. Such a place was called by the Greeks and Latins 
axrjvrj — afent under which the actors went through their per- 
formances; whilst in the theatres the athletic games were 
exhibited ; such as those five comprehended under the name of 
the pentathlum (kzwou)\ov). These were, throwing the discus 
or quoit, the race, leaping, throwing the dart, wrestling. These 
several games had sometimes distinct places set apart for their 
performance : thus, in the stadium, men contended in the foot- 
race ; in the hippodrome, the horse-races took place ; and in the 
circus, the chariot-races. Finally, the theatre, which had that 
extensive signification that we have explained, was distinguished 
from the amphitheatre. The latter was of a perfectly round form ; 
it was made up, as it were, of two theatres. Those who con- 
tended in the athletic exercises w r ere naked ; hence it was that 
the name gymnasium was given to the building in which they 
prepared for their exercises, or actually performed these exercises 
after they had been trained— the Greek word yv^og, whence 
gymnasium is derived, signifying naked. Antiochus Epiphanes, 
as it is related in the first book of the Machabees, introduced the 
Grecian customs into Judea, and compelled the Jews to have 
their young men trained in the gymnastic art. This the writer 
of the first book of Machabees bewails, (i, 15, 16.) This custom 
of putting off the clothes when one engaged in the athletic games 



496 



OF THE GAMES AXD AMUSEMENTS TO WHICH 



was, of course, in itself highly indecent ; at the same time, St. 
Paul could well take from it a comparison for the instruction of 
the Hebrews, in the same way as our Lord in the Gospel takes 
a comparison from the unjust steward. (Luke, xvi.) Thus St. 
Paul addresses the Hebrews (xii, 1) : " Laying aside every weight 
and sin which surrounds us, let us run by patience to the fight pro- 
posed to us" St. Paul here compares the Christian life to the 
contest of the foot-race in the stadium. In the Greek we read 
Tge%oi){L"iv rov. -ogy„h[javqv rjfLtv ayma ; as if he said: " Let 
us run the course that is before us, let us contend in the proposed 
race ; and that we may be free in our movements, let us imitate 
those who run in the stadium, laying aside every incumbrance, 
and laying aside sin, which seeks to adhere more closely than the 
dress that is around the body." St. Paul alludes clearly to the 
gymnastic art in his first epistle to the Corinthians (ix, 24) : 
44 Know you not that they that run in the race, (ora&oi/,) all 
run indeed, but one receiveth the prize (to B^aj3siov) ; so run 
that you may obtain." He who conquered in the race won the 
palm — the crown — the prize, which the Greeks called i3pa(3sio\>. 
That there is question here of a crown, the following words 
show (25) : " And every one that striveth for the mastery 
(o ay cavi^o/jbsvog) refraineth himself from all things; and they 
indeed that they may receive a corruptible crown ; but we 
an incorruptible one." That word ayuifopsvos shows that 
there is question of public contests or games, such as the race, 
wrestling, the contest of the pugilists. Those who were ad- 
mitted as candidates for the prize in these games were obliged 
to submit previously to a severe regimen, and a course of 
arduous preparatory exercises. Thus Horace informs us : Arte 
Poetica, v. 412 : — 

Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam 
Multa tulit fecitque puer ; sudavit et alsit : 
Abstinuit veiiere et vino — 

In the next verse to those already cited we find the Apostle 
alluding both to the race and to the contests of the pugilists : 
" I therefore so run, not as at an uncertainty ; I so fight, not as 
one beating the air." (26.) The first part of this verse alludes 
to the contest in the race. Here the goal was the object 
towards which the candidates for the piize were to run; and, 
being sure of its position, they would not lose ground through 
any uncertainty as to the direction which they ought to take. 
This is what the Apostle says, " I run not as at an uncertainty" 
w5 oux adr,A^c • for I have placed before me the goal, to 
which I look, and towards which I direct my course ; that is to 



OF THE GrAMES AND AMUSEMENTS, ETC. 



497 



say, all that I do I refer to God, and do it for His glory. The 
following part of the verse- refers to pugilism : I so fight" — in 
the original wvxreva) — that is, I so act the pugilist, I so fight 
with the ccestus (which was a thong of leather, having plummets 
of lead fastened to it, and worn on the hand by the boxers,) 
(i not. as one beating the air that is, I do not make vain strokes, 
missing my adversary, and wasting my strength on the air. As 
Virgil says of Entellus — 

" Entellus vires in ventum effud.it." 

-ZEneid, v, 443. 

That St. Paul alludes to the ccestus, appears from the follow- 
ing verse : " jBut I chastise my body and bring it into subjection ; 
lest, perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should 
become a castaway." (27.) He who fought with the castas 
inflicted such blows on his adversary as left livid marks on his 
body. As St. Paul had compared himself to a pugilist, he points 
out who his adversary is — it is his own flesh, for it is the adver- 
sary of the spirit. He says then, that he chastises his body : 
the Greek word for chastise is uwwnta£u, which is the same as 
the Latin contundo, lividum facto ; vkghcioi are marks, wheals, 
or tumours, caused by blows on the body — (the word originally 
signified the marks or wheals caused by striking under the eye.) 
The whole meaning of the verse is, that St. Paul subjected his 
body to the most rigid mortilication lest it might rebel against 
the spirit. 

St. Paul also alludes to the race in the stadium, when, in the 
epistle to the Philippians, third chapter, he says, that he suf- 
fered the loss of all things for Christ, and adds, v, 11, u If by 
any means I may attain to the resurrection which is from the dead.''' 
He signifies that he endures all things that he may arrive at the 
gaol which is placed before him, that is, a happy resurrection, 
v, 12, "Not as tJtough I had already attained or were already 
perfect: but I follow after, if I may by any means apprehend, 
wherein 1 am also apprehended by Christ Jesus." As if St. Paul 
said : I have not yet finished my course : I have not reached the 
gaol that 1 may receive the prize — not as though . I 

tvere already perfect : but I follow after, that is, I continue to 
run, dicozaj, I prosecute the race that I may at length lay hold 
on the prize, which is Christ, whom I shall receive as my reward ; 
for he is to be my reward who has called me to the race, who 
has enrolled me among the candidates for the prize, (v, 13.) 
" Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended. But one 
thing I do : forgetting the things that are behind, and stretching 
forth myself to those that are before." He perseveres in the 

2k 



498 



MANNEE OF TREATING THE DEAD, OE BTTETAL, 



metaphor taken from those who contend in the race, who, having 
made a certain progress, but not having yet arrived at the gaol, 
think no more of the space over which they have passed, but 
direct all their efforts to what is before them, that is to the part 
of the course which they have yet to run. (v, 14.) "I press towards 
the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ 
Jesus.'' 1 In the race which St. Paul was running the prize or 
Irabeion was none other than Christ. 

St. Paul had again in view the contest in the race when he 
says in the fourth chapter of the second epistle to Timothy, (v, 7,) 
I have fought a good fight (bonum certamen certavi — rov ayuva 
to v xocXov 7]yoni6 l 'j,ai — I have finished my course, I have kept the 
faith, (v, 8.) As to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of 
justice, which the Lord, the just judge, will render to me in that day. 
The contest of which the apostle speaks, and which is rendered 
in our English version a fight, is explained by what follows, to 
refer to the contest in the race. The judges of the games 
awarded the palm to the victors. So, St. Paul, persevering in 
the metaphor, introduces Christ as the judge (ayuvokrTjs) in 
this contest of the race, who will award to him the palm that he 
merits. We must not omit to mention that the athletm before 
entering on the contest had their bodies rubbed over with a cer- 
tain ointment ; in like manner, as a symbol of spiritual, strength 
the sick Christian is to be anointed according to the divine insti- 
tution, in order that he may be prepared to struggle successfully 
against the devil at the time of death. (St. James, v, 14, 15.) 
The whole life of the servant of Christ is a perpetual ayuv or 
contest : therefore does St. Paul speak of himself and of others 
as like persons engaged in the athletic games, saying in his 
epistle to the Philippians, (iv, 3,) " And I entreat thee also, 
my sincere companion, help those ivomen that hare laboured with me 
in the gospel" In the Greek cow^Xr^av {simul certarunt). But, 
for the explanation of more allusions of this kind, we must refer 
to the commentators on the New Testament. 



CHAPTER XII. 

OE THE MANNER OE T KEATING THE DEAD, OF BURIAL, AXD 
MOURNING- AMONG THE HEBREWS. 

Ftrst. — Treatment of the Deceased. The first office rendered to 
the deceased person among the Jews was to close his eyes : this 
was done by a relation or dear friend : and this custom was not 
peculiar to the Hebrews, but existed also among the Greeks and 



AND MOURNING AMONG THE HEBREWS. 



499 



other nations. The next office was the ablution of the corpse, as 
we see observed in the case of Tabitha, mentioned in the Acts of 
the Apostles, (ix, 37.) The Greeks and Romans also observed 
this practice ; for we often find mention made of it in their 
writings. To these offices the Jews added the embalming of the 
body, particularly when the deceased was a person of fortune 
and distinction. This was done by laying around the body a 
quantity of spices and aromatic drugs. Thus we find that Nico- 
demus brought, for the purpose of embalming our Redeemer's 
body, a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pounds 
weight. (St. John, xix, 39.) The embalming was usually 
repeated for several days together. Then the body was wrapped 
up in linen bandages. Thus, in the same place of St. John's 
Gospel, we find that Joseph of Arimathea and Xicodemus " took 
the body of Jesus, and bound it in linen cloths with the spices as 
the manner of the Jews is to bury." (St. John, xix, 40.) AVe 
see by the Egyptian mummies what vast quantities of linen were 
used by that people for this purpose — of bandaging the embalmed 
corpses. Among the Jews the head and face of the deceased 
person were bound with a napkin ; which was a separate thing, 
detached from the other bandages of the body : thus we read of 
Lazarus, that his face was bound about with a napkin (St. John, 
xi, 44) : and when Peter entered our Redeemer's sepulchre after 
his resurrection he found " the napkin that had been about His 
head not lying with the linen cloths, but apart, wrapt up into 
one place." (St. John, xx, 7.) 

Second. — Rites of Sepulture. Although the funeral obser- 
vances were different among different nations, yet it was con- 
sidered by all an ignominious thing to be deprived of the usual 
rite, or to have the body left a prey to dogs, birds, and wild 
beasts. Hence, warriors threatened their adversaries in battle 
with this disgrace ; and the prophets found it a powerful means 
of encouraging the Hebrews in the combat, or of turning them 
away from their crimes, to announce the threat — that of their 
carcasses God would prepare a banquet for the wild beasts and 
birds of prey. The patriarchs buried their dead a few days 
after death. (Gen., xxiii, 2, 4; xxv, 9; xxxv, 29.) Their pos- 
terity in Egypt appear to have delayed the sepulture for a longer 
period. Hence, the Mosaic law declared that uncleanness tor 
seven days would be contracted by the contact of a dead body, 
that by this inconvenience the people might be forced to hasten 
the time of burial. At a later period the Jews, following the 
example of the Persians, buried the dead soon after their decease. 
The funeral of Tabitha was delayed to await the arrival of St. 
Peter. (Acts, ix, 37.) The care of the funeral, as well as of the 



500 



MANNER OF TREATING THE DEAD, OF EtTRI \L, 



deposition of the body in the sepulchre, was committed to the 
sons, relations, and friends, or to the slaves of the deceased. A 
coffin was not in use except in Egypt and Babylon, but the body 
being bandaged and wrapt up in fine linen was placed upon a 
bier, (Deut., iii, 11,) and carried to the sepulchre by four or six 
of the relatives. Mourners accompanied the bier with lamenta- 
tions ; and to render these the more solemn, wailing women and 
musicians were hired to take part in the mourning. (Gen., 1, 7, 
11; Amos, v, 16; Matt., ix, 23; xi, 17.) Persons of distinc- 
tion, who had earned the favour of the people by their illustrious 
deeds, had their funerals honoured by the attendance of great 
multitudes. (Gen., 1, 7, 14; 1st Kings, xxv, 1; 2nd Paralip., 
xxxii, 33; 3rd Kings, xiv, 13.) 

Third. — Of the tombs of the Jews. The burying places were 
outside the cities, towns, and villages. This was required by 
the Mosaic law regarding legal defilement. But it was not less 
usual among the other nations, and is still observed in the East, 
where only kings, and others who have deserved well of the 
state, are allowed a sepulchre within the city. The tombs of 
the Hebrew kings were on Mount Sion. The people loved to 
have their tombs under shady trees, and in gardens; and as 
places of this sort were not common property, hence almost all 
the burying places were appropriated to certain families. How- 
ever, we rind mention made of some burying places that were 
common (4th Kings, xxiii, 6 ; Jerem., xxvi, 23,) or destined for 
a certain class in society. To be buried in one's paternal sepul- 
chre was reputed a singular honour ; but to be excluded from it 
was a great disgrace. The bodies of enemies were sometimes 
given up to their families ; but sometimes, although asked for, 
were refused. The privilege of burial in the paternal sepulchre, 
was refused to lepers. (2 Paralip., xxvi, 23.) Kings who were 
odious for their crimes were deprived of royal sepulture. 
(2nd Par., xxi, 20; xxiv, 25; xxviii, 27.) To be committed to 
the tomb clandestinely and without mourning — which was 
termed the burial of an ass — was considered the greatest ignominy. 
(Jerem. xxii, 16-19; xxxvi, 3.) The common people, without 
doubt, buried their dead in the earth, as is now generally the 
custom in the East ; but persons of rank had, for this purpose of 
sepulture, caves or subterraneous vaults. These caves were 
either such as were found already formed, or they were made 
by digging out the earth, or, finally, they were hewn in the 
rocks. Many such tombs still remain in Syria, Palestine, and 
Egypt, the most beautiful of which are those situated to the 
north of Jerusalem, called the royal sepulchres'; 'which, it is 
thought, may have been the work of the Herods. Into these tonils 



AND MOURNING A3I0XO THE HEBREWS. 



501 



there is a descent by means of steps, and very many of them 
consist of two, some of three, and some even of as many as seven 
chambers or compartments. In Egypt there still remains the 
ruins of most magnificent sepulchres, to which, according to Jahn, 
allusion is made in the book of Job. (iii, 14 ; xvii, 2.) 

Some circumstances might lead us to suppose that the 
Hebrews, after the example of several other nations, buried 
along with their dead, gold, silver, and other precious objects ; 
but such a supposition is, in reality, unfounded. Sometimes, 
however, they put in the tomb of the warrior the arms which 
he had used, (Ezech., xxxii, 22) ; and in the tomb of the king, 
the insignia of royalty. Thus, such insignia were found in the 
tomb of David, when Herod caused it to be opened. Jahn 
observes here that if John Hyrcanus, as Josephus relates, 
found a treasure in the tomb of David, it was no other 
than the treasure of the temple, which, in the days of Antiochus 
Epiphanes, had been secreted in this place. 

As to the practice of burning the body before interment, 
several passages of scripture seem to prove that this practice was 
observed in the case of some of the ancient Hebrew kings. The 
inhabitants of Jabes Galaad burned the body of Saul. (1st Kings, 
xxxi, 12.) Asa was placed upon a couch, covered with aromatic 
spices, of which they made for him, according to the expression 
of the scripture, a very pompous burning (2nd Paralip., xvL 14) ; 
and it is remarked that the same honour was not paid to Joram, 
his grandson. (2nd Paralip., xxi, 19.) The prophet Jeremias 
(xxxiv, 5,) predicts to Sedecias that he shall die in peace, aud 
that they shall render the last offices to him, particularly that of 
the burning, as it was done to his predecessors. And that the 
burning of the body was not confined to royal personages 
would appear from the prophet Amos, who, describing a morta- 
lity that was to desolate Jerusalem, says, among other things, 
that "a man's kinsman shall take him up and shall burn him 
that he may carry the bones out of the house." (Amos., vi, 10.) 
Notwithstanding these testimonies, many contend that among 
the Hebrews there was no instance of the burning of the body ; 
or, at least, that such a case was very rare ; and that the ex- 
amples referred to ought to be understood of the spices, and 
perhaps of the dress and other appurtenances of the deceased, 
which were burned over or around the bodies, but not of the 
bodies themselves : and it is thus that the Chaldee Paraphrast 
and the Eabbins have understood the matter. But the texts 
are too clear to permit us absolutely to deny that the dead 
bodies themselves were burned. At least this must have been 
sometimes the case ; not indeed in such a way as to reduce them 



502 



MANNER OF TREATING THE DEAD, OF BURIAL, 



to ashes ; they were satisfied with consuming the flesh by means 
of the lire, and then they put the hones, together with the ashes, in 
the -tomb. (TideCalmet. Dissert at. sur les Funerailles desHebreux. 

In tine, the wealthy and distinguished families raised over 
their dead superb and ostentatious monuments, which they were 
careful to maintain in their original beauty. To this custom 
our Eedeemer alludes in the gospel, saying, " "Woe to you, 
Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites : because you are like to whited 
sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but 
within are full of dead men's bones, and of all filthiness. So 
you also outwardly, indeed, a]} ear to men just ; but inwardly you 
are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (St. Matthew, xxiii. 27, 28.) 

Fourth. — Circumstances and duration of the Jewish Mourning. 
"We have to notice here, not only the private mourning of the 
Jews for the death of relations or friends, but also the public 
mourning of the whole people on certain extraordinary occasions. 
As to private mourning, we may observe that the descrip- 
tions which travellers give us of the funeral mourning of the 
Easterns are almost incredible. The care of announcing the 
death of a member of the family appears to be reserved to the 
women, whose grief is manifested by the cries which immediately 
fill the entire house. The gestures of these mourners are still 
more expressive than their lamentations : they strike their breasts, 
they pluck out their hair, tear their garments, cast themselves 
on their faces on the ground ; they run, stop suddenly, and in the 
midst of these movements and tragic cries, the most eloquent of 
these wailing women will pronounce or chant the eulogium of 
the deceased. Not satisfied with bewailing him in the house, 
these women go to renew their lamentations on his tomb. The 
grief of the men also, although less remarkable in its manifesta- 
tions, is still very vehement. 2sow, these descriptions of the 
Eastern mourning are very nearly conformable to the idea which 
the scripture gives us of the grief exhibited by the Jews at the 
death of their relations or friends. TTe see in the gospel that 
the Jews had also adopted the Gentile custom of hiring musi- 
cians {MbicineSj) to bear a part in the funeral mourning. (St. 
Matt., ix. 23.) The use of the tibia on such occasions is referred 
to by Ovid, 4, East. 

" Cantabat mcestis tibia fun eribus." 

That the Jews were not strangers to the custom of hiring 
mourning women on the same occasions appears from the Prophet 
Jeremias. (ix, 17, 18.) These mourning women — the same as 
the prceficce of the Romans — were like the Irish keeners : they 
dwelt in sorrowful strains on the praises of the deceased. Among 



AND MOURNING AMONG THE HEBEEWS. 503 

the numerous signs of grief which were usual in the time of 
the ancient Hebrews, we remark particularly that one, of going 
with the garments, or at least with the upper garment, rent. A 
similar custom exists to this day in Persia, where, in times of 
mourning, they wear the upper garment rent from the neck to 
the girdle. The other signs of mourning were : to go with the 
feet and head uncovered; to conceal the under part of the face in 
the cloak ; to cut off the beard ; or at least to neglect the care of 
it. In these circumstances the use of perfumes and scented oils 
was discontinued, as well as the use of the bath : there were no 
more conversations with any one ; the mourner would lie on 
ashes, cover his head with them, or sometimes scatter them in 
the air. In times of mourning they also fasted, abstained from 
wine, kept away from banquets, and subjected themselves to 
other privations, which it would be too tedious to enumerate. 
The law only forbade them to pluck out the hair of the eye- 
brows, and to tear the face. (Levit., xix, 28 ; Dent., xiv, 1, 2.) 
Several passages as well of the Old as of the New Testament 
prove that it was usual, during the period of mourning, to pay 
visits of condolence to the relatives of the deceased. (Gen., 
xxxvii, 35 ; 2nd Kings, x, 2 ; 2nd Paral., vii, 22 ; John, xi, 31.) 
It was also customary with the Hebrew?, as well as with several 
ancient nations, for the family of the deceased person to prepare 
a solemn banquet after the funeral. The friends of the family 
sent presents to it, and went themselves to console the relatives 
of the deceased, and to induce them to take food, supposing that 
otherwise they would neglect themselves in their affliction. From 
this practice come the expressions — the bread of grief t the eup of 
consolations. (2nd Kings, iii, 35 ; Jerem., xvi, 4, 5, 7 ; Ezech., 
xxiv, 16, 17 ; Osee, ix, 4.) Among the ancient Hebrews we also 
find the custom of placing food and wine on the tombs of the 
dead. (Tobias, iv, 18 ; Eccles., xxx, 18.) Calmet observes 
" that it is well known that this usage was very common among 
the Pagans, and that it existed also among the Christians. "With 
the latter, as well as among the Jews, these were repasts of 
charity, instituted principally in favour of the poor. But on 
account of abuses which crept into the practice, St. Augustine 
abolished it in Africa." (Calmet, Dissert, sur les Funerailles des 
Hebreax.) The duration of the mourning was, ordinarily, seven 
days for private individuals, and thirty for princes and persons of 
great distinction. Such was the ordinary time of mourning, for 
the scripture affords us several examples in which these limits 
were not observed. (Gen., xxxvii, 35; 1, 3, 10; 1st Kings, 
xxxi, 13 ; Judith, xvi, 29.) In his observations on the king- 
doms of Algiers and Tunis, Shaw has the following remark : 



504 



THE PRINCIPAL 



COMMENTATORS, 



" After the funeral is over, the female relations, during the space 
of two or three months, go once a week to weep over the grave." 
(Shaw's Travels, &c, vol. 1, p. 396.) A similar usage existed 
among the Hebrews, for we read in the Gospel that Mary, the 
sister of Lazarus, having gone forth to meet Christ, the Jews who 
were assembled at her house to console her, followed her, believing 
that she was going to weep at the tomb of her brother. (St. 
John, ii, 31.) 

. Of Public Mourning, the occasion would be some calamity, 
in which not one family only, but the whole people was con- 
cerned ; as, for example, famine, war, pestilence ; or the death 
of kings or princes who deserved well of the state ; thus, there 
was public mourning for Moses, Aaron, Josue, Judith, and 
ethers. And not only was there public mourning when some 
great misfortune actually happened, but even when it was dreaded. 
Hence it was that the predictions of the prophets so often gave 
occasion to such mourning. 

The signs of the public differed but little from those of the 
private mourning. They were : tears, cries, sobs, solemn fasts, 
&c. The doors of the houses were kept closed, the course of 
business was interrupted, and a city in mourning presented the 
image of a dreary solitude. (See Isaias, iii, 26 ; xxiv, 10 * and 
Jeremias, xiv.) 



DISSERTATION XVIII. 

OF THE CATHOLIC COMMENTATORS, AND OTHER WRITERS ON THE 

SCRIPTURE. 



CHAPTEE I. 

FIRST PERIOD FROM THE APOSTOLIC TIMES TO THE COMMENCEMENT 

OP THE SEVENTH CENTURY. 

purpose, in this concluding dissertation, to give some account 
of the principal authors, particularly the commentators, who 
have illustrated the sacred scripture by their writings. In carrying 
out this purpose, we divide the time that has elapsed from the 
days of the apostles to the present time into three periods, which 
shall form the subject of as many chapters. 

In this first period many such writers are found, of whom 



AKD OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



505 



the principal ones were the Holy Fathers of the Church. In this 
period, as well as in those which succeeded, the Jewish doctors 
laboured in the interpretation of the sacred scripture of the Old 
Testament. These labours have been variously estimated by 
Christian writers : some holding that they are useless, dangerous, 
and altogether to be avoided ; others arriving at a different con- 
clusion. Of this latter class we may particularise Mariana, well 
known by his Scholia on the Scripture, who has ably defended 
the opinion (which, indeed, at present' is undisputed,) that the 
reading of the Jewish Kabbins may be useful to the theologian. 
He rests this view of the case— first, on the authority of the 
fathers and doctors of the church, such as Origen, Eusebius of Cse- 
sarea, who freely had recourse to these works, and have employed 
them to the advantage of Christianity ; secondly, on the utility 
which may be derived from these works, as well in acquiring a 
greater knowledge of the Hebrew language and in removing the 
difficulties of the literal sense, which is often well explained in 
them ; as also in preparing to refute the arguments of the Jews, 
which shall be done more efficaciously when their own principles 
are turned against them. And, indeed, St. Jerome, and in these 
latter times, Yatable and many others, have often, in explaining 
the ^ripture, turned to good account what they found in the 
Jewish commentators. As regards the prophecies which refer 
to Christ they are doubtless blind guides, having the veil upon 
their eyes ; and in these places they ought not to be read, except 
for the purpose of refuting them ; but, in the purely historical 
parts, their better knowledge of the Hebrew language, and their 
greater familiarity with the style and phraseology of the sacred 
writers, give them an advantage over the greater part of 
commentators in discovering the literal sense. Our business, 
however, here is, with the Christian commentators and writers 
upon scripture. 

The famous school of Alexandria, which dates its origin from 
the days of St. Mark, the founder of that church, was never 
without some divines who devoted themselves to the explanation 
of the sacred scripture. Of these the earliest whose name has 
reached us is St. Pant^xtjs. He was born in Sicily in the 
second century. Vhen he became president of the school of 
Alexandria, the fame of his writings attracted a vast concourse of 
scholars to that place of learning. Among these we find Clement 
of Alexandria, who succeeded him in the government of the 
school. The people of India having asked for some teacher 
capable of instructing them in the Christian religion, Pantaenus 
was sent to them. On his return to Alexandria, he resumed 
privately the teaching of the scripture, as the city school was then 



506 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



Tinder the care of Clement, his former pupil. Pantsemus composed 
commentaries on the bible which have not reached our times. 

Clement of Alexandria was put at the head of the school 
of that city in the year 190. His scholars were exceedingly 
numerous, of whom the most distinguished was Origen. Clement 
explained briefly different parts of the Old and ^Tew Testament, 
in eight books of Hypotyposes. This commentary has also 
perished. However, the general character of the commentaries 
of Pantsenus and Clement may be inferred from those of Origen, 
which have reached us. 

Origen was born at Alexandria in the year 185. As he grew 
up his indefatigable application to study procured for him the 
surname of the Adamantine. Such diligent attention to study, 
united to a brilliant genius, soon enabled him to surpass in the 
extent of his erudition his former master Clement, as well as all 
the other Christian doctors of that period. All who were then 
employed in the interpretation of the scripture were left far 
behind by him on account of his superior knowledge of the lan- 
guages and antiquities of the East. We have in another place 
mentioned the benefit conferred by him on scriptural studies, by 
his famous Hexapla. In addition to this work he published, on 
almost all the books of the Old and New Testament, a threefold 
exposition: explaining them by a series of scholia or notes; 
again by a commentary ; and thirdly, by a series of homilies. 
Of these works, only parts have escaped the ravages of time. It 
is particularly to be regretted that his scholia have not come 
down to us, because in these he confined himself to the explana- 
tion of the literal sense. However, it is supposed that St. 
Chrysostom and the other interpreters who came after Origen 
have embodied in their works the most useful portion of these 
notes. The tendency of the Christian interpreters of the time 
was to dwell particularly on the mystical sense of the scripture, 
and this Origen has done in his homilies and commentary even 
to excess. He was also too fond of borrowing ideas from the 
Platonic school of philosophy, which then had great vogue in 
Alexandria, and generally throughout the East. The general 
character of the writings of Origen, and how far he is to be held 
responsible for the errors which they contain, are subjects which 
have given occasion to long continued and warm disputes between 
the learned who have come after him. 

St. Hilary of Poitiers, doctor of the church, was born in 
that city in the beginning of the fourth century. His commen- 
taries on the scripture embrace only the explanation of a part of 
the book of Psalms and of the gospel of St. Matthew. These 
commentaries are highly esteemed. In the Psalms he explains 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



507 



well trie literal and mystical sense : whilst the commentary on 
St. Matthew is particularly useful to the pastor cf souls, con- 
taining as it does, excellent instructions on all the Christian 
virtues, and principally on charity, fasting, and prayer.* 

St. Amrrose, doctor of the church, and Archbishop of Milan, 
was born about the middle of the fourth century. Among other 
works he has left several treatises on the holy scripture, which 
entitle him to be ranked among the principal commentators of 
his time. 

St. Jerome, born about the year 340, is, as regards scrip- 
tural studies, the most renowned of all the fathers and doctors of 
the church. The prayer which the church uses on his festival 
has the remarkable words, " Deus qui ecclesice tuce in exponendis 
sacris scripturis beatum Hieronymum confessorcm tuum, doctorem 
maximum provider e dignatus es." AVe have already spoken of his 
labours in the translation of the scripture. His commentaries 
extend over several books of the Old and Xew Testament. His 
knowledge of the languages, vast erudition, and devotedness to 
scriptural studies qualified him in an eminent degree for the task 
of commeuting on the scripture. His exposition of the prophets 
is the most esteemed of his exegetical works. It is to be re- 
gretted that he did not restrict himself more to the investigation 
of the literal sense ; but the custom of the time was, to dwell 
particularly on the mystical sense, and on allegorical meanings of 
the text. Yet, St. Jerome, although yielding considerably to this 
prevalent custom of the time, has by no means omitted to explain 
the literal sense, and in several places even with great fulness. 
The great erudition of this father enabled him to quote with 
facility in his commentary from several authors, Eabbinical and 
others ; and on account of a certain hurry in the composition of 
his work, he has sometimes introduced these quotations without 
apprising the reader that they were quotations and not his own 
words. Richard Simon observes, that in consequence of this 
practice a superficial reader might imagine that this holy father 
sometimes contradicts himself, whereas, whoever will take care 
to make himself acquainted with his method will perceive that 
there is no real contradiction, the discrepancy being in truth 
between St. Jerome and some other author, to the correctness of 
whose views he by no means pledges himself. 

St. Augustine, born about the middle of the fourth century, 
has been always regarded as one of the greatest lights of the 

* A commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul by St. Hilary has been 
just published in the volume of the Spicilegium Solesmense, Paris, Firmin 
"Didot. 



508 



THE PELSTCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



church of God. ^ This rank has been accorded to him principally 
on account of his dogmatic writings. He composed several trea- 
tises on the sacred scripture, which are contained in the third 
volume of the Benedictine edition of his works : and the fourth 
volume of that edition is occupied with his commentary on the 
Psalms. St. Augustine was inferior to St. Jerome in the know- 
ledge of the languages, and hence he was not so well qualified 
for undertaking the literal explanation of the sacred text ; and, 
indeed, in his commentary on the Psalms, we find him for the 
most part dwelling on the mystical sense. In his book De Doc- 
trina Christiana, as we observed in a previous part of this work, 
lie has laid down excellent rules for the interpretation of scrip- 
ture ; and these rules he has more exactly followed in his writ- 
ings on the New Testament than in his commentary on the 
Psalms. His treatise on St. John, his harmony of the gospels, 
aud his literal exposition of the epistle to the Galatians, throw a 
great light on these portions of scripture. St. Augustine, 
although a man of the most commanding genius and the quickest 
penetration, and possessing a most profound acquaintance with 
the dogmas of the Christian religion, was still impressed to a 
wonderful degree with the conviction of the difficulty of explain- 
ing the scripture. He has expressed himself to this purpose in 
several places, particularly in his book on Genesis, entitled Liber 
de Genesi ad liter am imperfectus. It is quite manifest that he 
had not made tbe acquaintance of that private spirit, which, in 
these latter times, has enabled so many evangelical Protestants, 
without any learning whatever, to make their way at once 
through the most difficult passages of the sacred text. 

St. Johx Chrysostom was born at Antioch in the year 344. 
He was surnamed Clirysostom on account of the golden streams of 
his eloquence. As an interpreter of scripture he ranks among 
the first of the fathers. In his eloquent homilies he has explained 
the greater part of the Old and the New Testament. The method 
which he usually follows in the homilies is to establish, first, 
the literal and historical sense of the passage ; then to make use 
oi' it for the refutation of the heresies of the time, and the con- 
firmation of the Catholic doctrine ; and, finally, to draw from it 
the practical, moral exhortation which it suggests. He does not 
altogether neglect the mystical sense, yet he dwells rather on 
the literal ; and in the Old Testament he cites the versions of 
Aquila, of Symmachus, and of Theodotion. He even adduces 
the Hebrew from the Hexapla of Origen. [Not having been 
acquainted with Hebrew himself, his commentary on the New 
Testament is superior to that on the Old. There is no exe- 
getical work in all antiquity to surpass what he has written on 



AXD OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTXRE. 



509 



the epistles of St. Paul. His commentary also on the historical 
books, especially on St. Matthew, is highly esteemed. In a 
word, for uniting the highest degree of eloquence with a clear, 
perspicuous and learned treatment of his subject, St. Chrysostom 
is not inferior to any writer, ancient or modern ; and all the Greek 
commentators on scripture who have followed him have drawn 
largely on the works of this father. 

Sr. Cyril op Alexandria, a bulwark of the church against 
the heresies of his time, particularly the ]Scstorian heresy, was 
born in the latter part of the fourth century, and became pa- 
triarch of Alexandria in the year 412. Among other writings, 
he has left us homilies and commentaries on several books of the 
Old and New Testament. He dwells much on the mystical 
sense ; but he is particularly careful to explain the dogmatical 
bearing of the text ; for this father never loses sight of the refu- 
tation of the heresies of the time. His name is particularly 
associated with the vindication of the dignity of the Blessed 
Virgin — the faoroxos, against the impious doctrines of ]S T estorius 
and his followers. 

Theodoret was born at Antioch towards the end of the fourth 
century, and made Bishop of Cyr, in Palestine, about the year 
423. He was a man of great learning and eloquence, and com- 
bated, with great zeal and success the various heresies of the 
time. He himself, however, was under a cloud for a time, 
owing to his friendship for John of Antioch and for Xestorius, in 
whose favour he wrote against the twelve anathemas of St. Cyril 
of Alexandria ; but having discovered the wrong course into 
which he had been misled, he was reconciled with this prelate, 
and anathematized the heresiarch. It does not appear that he 
ever embraced the doctrine of Nestorius ; but that hypocritical 
knave and his adherents had so far imposed upon him as to make 
him believe that the council of Ephesus and St. Cyril had taught 
the unity of nature in Christ. Theodoret composed several exe- 
getical works on the sacred scripture : first, a commentary, by 
way of question and answer, on the first eight books of the 
bible ; second, a commentary on all the Psalms ; third, an expla- 
nation of the Canticle of Canticles ; fourth, commentaries on 
Jeremias, on Ezechiel, on Daniel, on the twelve minor prophets, 
and on the epistles of St. Paul. This father was well acquainted 
with the Greek versions of the Hexapla, and he sometimes cites 
the Hebrew text, determining its sense with great judgment. 
His commentary, or rather notes, on St. Paul, are taken in great 
part from St. Chrysostom, interspersed at the same time with 
very useful observations of his own. On the whole, Theodoret 
has rendered great service to the study of scripture by his works. 



510 



THE PB1XCLPAL COMMENTATORS, 



Certainly, Richard Simon, who is a severe critic, is even lavish 
in his praises of this father for the judgment and learning 
displayed in his commentaries, as well by his own observations 
as by the judicious manner in which he has selected the best 
things from others. Theodoret, of course, wrote in Greek ; so 
did the other commentators already mentioned, except SS. Hilary, 
Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine, who wrote in Latin. 

St. Ephrem, the Syrian, deacon of Edessa, and doctor of the 
church, flourished in the middle of the fourth century. He 
was a great light of the church of God, which he enriched with 
several learned works, many of which are still preserved. The 
Roman edition, which is the best, contains them in six volumes 
folio. In it the original Syriac text of a good part of the works 
is given, and the ancient Greek version of the rest. The 
works of this father are particularly valuable, as they contain 
the testimony of the Syriac church of the fourth century to the 
Catholic faith of all ages. St. Ephreni was a man of great 
eloquence; whilst, throughout, his style is easy and unaffected. 
If his tropes are sometimes bold, it must be admitted that 
they are always natural, considering the genius of the Oriental 
languages. He was a perfect master of the Syriac tongue, in 
which he wrote. It does not appear that he ever learned Greek ; 
for it is related in his life that, about six years before his death, 
which occurred at a very advanced age, having gone to see St. 
Basil, he conversed with that holy doctor through an interpreter. 
St. Ephreni has left commentaries on the five books of Closes, on 
Josue, Judges, and the four books of Kings, on Job, and on all 
the prophets. His exposition is throughout very literal, full, 
and learned. 

St. Isdioee oe Pelusiex was a monk from his youth, and 
became superior of a monastery in the neighbourhood of Pelusium, 
in the fifth century. His works that are extant consist almost 
entirely of letters, which amount to the number of two thousand 
and twelve. These letters are concise, and written in elegant 
and even classic Greek. They abound with excellent instruc- 
tions of piety, and with theological and critical learning. The 
holy author has, in these letters, explained several passages of 
scripture with such precision and solidity, that he is justly 
ranked among the commentators on scripture of this period. 

Cassiodoetjs (Magnus Aurelius), a Calabrian, was born of an 
illustrious family, in the latter part of the fifth century. He 
became minister of state to Theodoric, Xing of Italy, and was 
sole consul in 514. After passing through the highest offices 
in the kingdom he determined to quit the world, and haviDg built 
a monastery near his native place, he retired to it in the 70th 



\ 

AND OTHER "WRITERS ON SCRIPS RE. 



511 



year of his age. Here he devoted himself to prayer, and to 
study, having provided a rich and well selected library. It was 
here that he published his commentary on the Psalms ; and also 
his Institutions of the Divine Scriptures, a collection of rules to 
direct his monks in the study of the sacred writings. Cassio- 
dorus explained also the Canticle of Canticles, and wrote many 
other learned works, all, of course, in Latin. And considering 
the time at which he wrote, his style is very pure and simple. 
The works of Cassiodorus, which had been previously printed 
separately, were all collected together, and published at Eoanne 
in 1679. 

St. Gregory the Great was raised to the pontificate in 
the year 590. Before and after his elevation to the popedom he 
was distinguished for sanctity and learning : and when pope he 
brought the English nation into the fold of Christ ; whilst he 
vigorously maintained ecclesiastical discipline throughout the 
whole church. This was the end which he had in view in the 
councils, which, from time to time, he held at Rome. He wrote 
several works, remarkable for the piety which they breathe, and 
the solid moral instructions which they convey. As a commen- 
tator on scripture we have from him a commentary on the book 
of Job. This is rather a series of moral instructions than a con- 
nected exposition of the text : hence it has got the name of the 
morals of St. Gregory on the book of Job. We have also his ex- 
position of Ezechiel, in twenty-two homilies. The exposition of 
the text is allegorical, and only intended for ushering in the 
moral reflections which are much shorter than in the books on 
Job. He has left, moreover, forty homilies on the Gospels : 
these were preached on several solemnities whilst he was pope. 
Finally we have an excellent exposition of the book of Canticles, 
which is justly attributed to this holy pontiff. 

Procopitjs of Gaza was a Greek rhetorician and sophist, who 
flourished about the middle of the sixth century. He has left 
us a catena*, or chain of Greek and Latin fathers on the eight 
first books of the bible : also commentaries on the books of Kings 
and Paralipomenon ; and commentaries on Isaias. His style 
is diffuse ; and yet he does not always sufficiently explain the 
literal sense of the text. These several commentaries have been 
all translated into Latin, and printed at various times. 

Besides the commentators mentioned already, several other 
authors belong to this period, who laboured to promote biblical 
studies in one way or other, by their writings. We have, more 

* This was the name which the Latin writers gave to any commen- 
tary on scripture that was composed of a series of extiactsfrom preceding 
interpreters ; these extracts being joined together like links in a chain. ° 



512 



?KF PRINCIPAL COXQIENTATORS, 



than once already, commemorated the labours of Orioen in pro- 
curing a correct edition of the Greek scriptures. Pierius, a 
priest of Alexandria, who belonged to the latter part of the third 
century, and is praised by the ancients for his singular erudition, 
skill in preaching, and in interpreting the scripture, exerted 
himself to propagate copies of Origen's edition. So did Pamphixus, 
a disciple of Pierius, and a priest of Csesarea in Palestine, who 
suffered martyrdom in the year 309. Hesycrtus, an Egyptian 
bishop, and Lucian, a priest of Antioch, brought out corrected 
editions of the original text of the New Testament, and of the 
Septuagint edition of the Old. During this period the scripture 
was translated into several languages. Tatian, who had been a 
disciple of St. Justin, but afterwards unfortunately became the 
head of an heretical sect, composed a harmony of the gospels in 
the second century ; and a similar work was composed by Ammo- 
nius, a learned Christian of Alexandria, in the century following. 
St. Jerome promoted the study of the scripture not only by his 
translation and commentaries already mentioned, but also by his 
book on the interpretation of the Hebrew names and by his cri- 
tical epistles. The Prologus Galeatus of the same holy doctor, 
and the prefaces which he prefixed to the books translated by 
him form a brief introduction to the sacred books ; and the archae- 
ology of the bible is indebted to him for his work on the situation 
and names of the Hebrew places. St. Augustine's second and 
third book on the Christian doctrine is a treatise on Hermeneu- 
tics. We have from the holy doctor four books on the agree- 
ment of the evangelists. Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea in 
Palestine, composed the famous canons on the gospels mentioned 
in an early part of this work. He has also left us a book on the 
names of the places mentioned in scripture. Eusebius, more- 
over, claims a place among the commentators on scripture, hav- 
ing written an exposition of the Psalms and of Isaias. The 
Arianism of this author has exhibited itself in his exposition of 
the Psalms, as is proved by Montfaucon. Biblical archaeology is 
indebted to St. Epiphanius for his book on measures and weights. 
Junilius, an African bishop of the sixth century, has left us an 
introduction to the sacred scripture, entitled " Of the Parts of 
the Divine Law." VicroR/Bishop of Capua about the year 545, 
has left us a harmony of the gospels, which is properly the har- 
mony of Ammonius translated into Latin, with additions from 
the pen of the learned translator. Primasius, who was Bishop 
of Adrumetum, in xlfrica, about the middle of the sixth century, 
has left us commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul, aud on the 
Apocalypse, which are a compilation from St. Augustine and 
other fathers on these books. Tichonius, a donatist writer, who 



AND OTHEE WRITERS OE SCEIPTTJEE. 



513 



lived in the fourth century, acquired great fame for genius and 
erudition. He composed a treatise on the rules for interpreting 
the scriptures. St. Augustine has given an abridgment of this 
treatise in his third book on the Christian doctrine. Tichonius 
is acknowledged at present for the real author of the commen- 
tary on St. Paul, which had been formerly attributed to St. 
Ambrose. 



CHAPTER II. 

SECOND PEEIOD: FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE SEVENTH TO 
THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 

St. Maximus, a Greek writer of the seventh century, was an 
abbot, and a confessor for the faith. He was a native of Con- 
stantinople, and descended from an ancient and noble family. 
He distinguished himself by the zeal with which he opposed the 
heresy of the Monothelites. This zeal brought upon him perse- 
cutions which only ended with his death in 602. His works 
were printed in 1675, at Paris, in two volumes, folio. A great 
part of them consists of commentaries on several books of the 
holy scripture, in which the author dwells principally on the 
allegorical sense. 

St. Isidore of Seville, one of the great lights of the 
Church of God, was made bishop of Seville in the beginning of 
the seventh century. So illustrious was he by his virtues and 
learning that the Council of Toledo, held in 653, styles him the 
Doctor of his times, and the new ornament of the church. He 
wrote several works in Latin : among the rest a commentary on 
the historical books of the Old Testament, of which only a part 
has come down to our times. It is not very literal. 

St. Julian, Archbishop of Toledo in the seventh century, 
was renowned for sanctity and learning. He wrote several 
works : and is ranked among the commentators on scripture, on 
account of his exposition of the prophet Xahum. 

St. John Damascen, or of Damascus, a priest, and a learned 
Greek writer of the eighth century, has left us several valuable 
works, the most famous of which is his four boohs on the orthodox 
faith. These comprise the whole course of theology, arranged 
in a scholastic and methodical manner. On account of this work 
Damascen holds the same rank among the Greeks as Peter Lom- 
bard and St. Thomas hold with us. This father was also 

2 L 



514 



THE PKIXCIPAL C0M1IEXTAT0HS, 



remarkably distinguished for his zeal against the Iconoclast 
heretics. The work which has made him to be ranked among 
the commentators on scripture is a brief exposition of all the 
Epistles of St. Paul, taken for the most part from St. John 
Chrysostom, but interspersed with various illustrations and 
additions of his own. The best edition of the works of this 
father is that of Le Quien, 1712, in folio, two volumes, Greek 
and Latin. This edition was reprinted at Verona in 1748, with 
improvements. 

Yexeka.bee Bede, a native of England, flourished in the be- 
ginning of the eighth century. He was greatly distinguished 
both for sanctity and learning, and he loved to employ his pen 
principally in the illustration of the sacred scripture. Tinder this 
head we have from him an exposition of the historical books of the 
Old Testament, of the booh of Tobias, of Job, of the Proverbs of 
Solomon, and of the Canticle of Canticles, an exposition of the New 
Testament, and questions on the Acts of the Apostles. Yery often, 
these commentaries are but- a collection of passages from the 
fathers ; but these are selected with great judgment, and arranged 
in a clear, methodical order. Bede appears to have been much 
attached to the views of St. Augustine. He composed his com- 
mentaries in Latin : but he did not confine himself to the read- 
ing of the Latin fathers. He was well acquainted with the 
Greek language, and was thus enabled to extract some of the 
best things from the Greek writers on scripture, and to under- 
stand better the force of the original text of the New Testament. 
Besides the works already mentioned, he wrote commentaries on 
the prophets, which have been lost. 

Alctjen was also a native of England, and a deacon of the 
Church of York. He was also master of the ecclesiastical school 
of York. The fame of his learning induced Charlemagne to 
invite him over to Prance and to take him for his master. 
Charlemagne honoured him with, his familiar friendship, and 
employed him in several important affairs of state, particularly 
in founding schools at Aix la Chapelle, at Tours, &c. Alcuin 
died at an advanced age in the year 804. He was a man of great 
erudition. Like Bede he mastered all the sciences which were 
attainable in that age. His knowledge, however, was not as 
profound as it was extensive. On matters of faith he was always 
strictly orthodox ; and was ever ready to employ his pen in the 
refutation of the heresies of his time. He composed Commenta- 
ries on Ecclesiastes, taken almost literally from a similar work of 
St Jerome's : seven books of Commentaries on the Gospel of St. 
John, drawn in a great measure from St. Augustine and Yene- 
rable Bede : an exposition of the Epistles of St. Paul to Titus and 



AND OTHER WRITERS OF SCRIPTURE. 



515 



Philemon, and to the Hebrews. These are his principal works on 
the scripture. His entire works were published at Paris in 
1617, in folio. But the best edition of them was printed at 
Patisbon in 1777, in two volumes, folio, with notes and disserta- 
tions. 

Pabanus Maukus, often called, from the Latin name of his 
archiepiscopal city, Moguntinus, was born at Fulda, in 788. 
After being educated for some time in the monastery of Fulda he 
was sent to Tours to study under Alcuil. Here he made great 
proficiency in learning, and laid the foundation of that fame 
which was soon to rival the fame of his master. Having returned 
to Fulda he was elected abbot of the monastery there ; and 
finally was made Archbishop of Mayence in 847. He continued 
to govern that see with great zeal and prudence until his death. 
He composed a great number of works both on profane and on 
sacred subjects. Among the latter are his commentaries on 
several of the books of the Old Testament, and on the gospel of 
St. Matthew and the epistles of St. Paul. These commentaries 
are almost all collected from the ancient interpreters, but inter- 
spersed here and there with mystical interpretations of his own. 
He has also left us one hundred and fifty-two homilies on the epis- 
tles and gospels of several of the Sundays and festivals of the 
year. The works of Pabanus were published at Cologne in 1627, 
in six tomes, folio. 

Olymfiodorus was a Greek writer, who, according to the 
common opinion, nourished in the latter part of the tenth cen- 
tury. Very little appears to be known about his history. He 
is called a monk by some. Several say that he was a deacon of 
the church of Alexandria or of Constantinople. There is a great 
uncertainty as to the writings which are to be ascribed to him. 
All admit that he composed a commentary on the book of 
Ecclesiastes. This commentary was published in Greek and 
Latin in the year 1624, in a supplement to the Bibliotheca 
Patrum. It is brief but learned and well written, and altogether 
one of the most favourable specimens of the commentaries of 
that age. 

Christian Drtjthmar was a native of Aquitain, and a monk 
of Corbie, in Prance. He flourished about the middle of the 
ninth century. He wrote a commentary on St. Matthew's 
gospel, remarkable among the Latin commentaries of that time 
for the literal exposition of the text. Early in the sixteenth 
century this book was printed at Strasburg, with some addi- 
tions by the editors containing erroneous doctrine on the subject 
of tran substantiate a. On account of these the edition was sup- 
pressed, and copies of it are therefore rare. A second edition of 



516 



THE PRINCIPAL CO^T^IEXTATORS 



it, printed in 1530, at Haguenau, was also suppressed on account 
of being conformable to the preceding. 

Walaerpdes Strabo was born in 806. He became a Bene- 
dictine monk in the monastery of Fulda, where he was educated 
under the care of Rabanus Maurus. He rose to high dignities in 
his order, and was greatly esteemed for his exemplary piety and 
extensive learning. He wrote several works. Of these by far 
the most famous is a brief commentary on the entire scripture, 
entitled Glossa Ordinaria in Saeram Scripturam. It may well 
be said that this is the most famous commentary on the scripture 
that was ever written. For centuries it was continually con- 
sulted and quoted by interpreters of scripture ; and to the student 
of the sacred volume it was as familiar an authority as was the 
Master of the Sentences in the theological schools. The work is 
in a great measure a compilation taken from the Latin interpre- 
ters who preceded Strabo, particularly from his former master, 
Eabanus Maurus. The author proposed to himself to give briefly 
the explanation of the literal and the mystical sense of the text : 
and it cannot be denied but he produced a most useful work. 
This work was printed at Paris in 1590, seven volumes in folio ; 
and again, at Antwerp, in 1634, six volumes in folio. The Ant- 
werp edition is the best. 

Pemigpes oe Aexerre — so called from having been a monk 
of St. German of Auxerre — went to Pheims by the invitation of 
the archbishop of that city about the year 882, for the purpose 
of establishing schools there. He was moderately acquainted 
with the Greek and Hebrew languages, and enjoyed throughout 
France the reputation of an universal scholar. He taught in 
Paris with great success and laid the foundation of the university 
in that city. He wrote in Latin commentaries on the Psalms, on 
the minor prophets, on the epistles of St. Paul, on the Canticle of 
Canticles, and on the Apocalypse. Some of these commentaries 
were for a long time attributed to Haymo. Throughout these 
commentaries, with the exception of that on the epistles of St. 
Paul, the author has principally indulged in the mystical inter- 
pretation. The works of Pemigius were printed partly at Cologne, 
1536, in folio, and partly in the Bibliotheca Patrum. 

Oecemenius was a Greek writer of the tenth century. He 
he has left us a commentary on the Acts and the Epistles of 
the Apostles. It is taken in a great measure from the fathers, 
particularly St. Chrysostom. The author made it his chief 
study to give a brief exposition of the literal sense of the text. 
He has also described very well the style of writing of the sacred 
authors. All his works, along with those of Aretas, were pub- 
ki^hed in Paris in 1631, two volumes, folio, Greek and Latin. 



AND OTB EE WEITEES OX SCRIPT UEE. 



517 



Kicetas was a deacon of the church of Constantinople, and 
afterwards Bishop of Heraclea. He flourished in the eleventh 
century. A catena or chain of Greek fathers on the book of Job 
is attributed to him. This was printed in London, 1637, folio, 
in Greek and Latin. He is also reckoned the author of a catena 
on the Psalms, and of a similar compilation on the Canticle of 
Canticles. 

Laneranc was born in Italy early in the eleventh century. 
He consecrated himself to God in the monastery of Bee, in 
France, of which he was afterwards made prior. It was after 
his appointment to this dignity that he opened his school, which 
became the most celebrated in Europe. William, Duke of Nor- 
mandy, having become King of England, had him promoted 
to the archbishopric of Canterbury. He enjoyed the highest 
reputation for learning ; nor was he less distinguished for his 
virtues and his zeal in maintaining ecclesiastical discipline and 
the rights of the church. Besides other works he wrote com- 
mentaries on St. Paul. In these he has applied the scholastic 
method to the interpretation of the text — distinguishing, prov- 
ing, concluding : a mode of commenting which cannot be well 
conceived without reading some of the authors who have adopted 
it. Of this kind of commentary we can affirm that however 
many moderns may be disposed to undervalue it, it is often most 
felicitous in setting in a clear light the meaning of the sacred 
writer. The works of Lanfranc were collected and published by 
D'Achery in 1648, in lolio, Paris. 

THEorHYLACT, a distinguished Greek writer of the eleventh 
century was archbishop of the metropolitan see of Bulgaria. 
He has left commentaries on the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, 
aiid the Epistles of St. Paul ; also on JIaba cue, Jonas, Nahum, 
and Osee. These are principally taken from St. Chrysostom. 
They are arranged, on the whole, with great judgment ; and 
the literal sense of the sacred text is well explained. It is to 
be regretted that this author had not the courage to oppose 
himself to the schism and the errors of the Greeks ; as appears 
by his commentary on the third chapter of St. John, where he 
censures the Latins for saying that the Holy Ghost proceeds 
from the Father and the Son. The best edition of his works is 
that published at Venice, 1754-1763, in four volumes, folio. 

Sedulius is the name of a Latin commentator on aSY. Paul's 
Ppistles, who flourished in the beginning of the ninth century. 
He composed also a commentary on St. Matthew, entitled Collec- 
taneum in Mathceum. It is admitted by all that he was an 
Irishman ; and there seems no doubt but that he was the same as 
Sedulius, abbot of Kildare, whose death is mentioned in the 



518 



THE PRIXC.PAL COMMENTATORS, 



Irish annals at the year 828. The annotations on St. Panl are 
principally taken from Origen, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, and St. 
Augustine. (See the sixth tome of the Bihliotheea Patrum, 
Lyons, 1677.) ¥e may observe here that this commentary on 
St. Paul has been attributed by some to another Sedulius, who 
lived in the fifth century, and who was greatly distinguished as a 
poet and a theologian. Eat, although the commentary was not 
written by this celebrated author, still we can claim him also as 
a countryman. It is true that his birth-place has been much 
disputed ; but those who have most profoundly investigated 
ancient Irish history, such as Usher, Colgan, Ware, and Harris, 
maintain that he was a native of Ireland. To the arguments 
adduced by them in favour of this opinion Dr. Lanigan adds 
another, taken from the name Sedulius, which is not found in 
other countries, whilst it often occurs in ancient Irish history. 
It is probably the Latinised form of Shi el. (See Dr. Lanigan's 
Ecclesiastical History of Ireland, vol. i, pp. 18. 19, 20.) Before 
taking leave of this last mentioned celebrated writer we may 
observe that some of the most beautiful hymns that are read in 
the church have been taken from his poems ; for example, A solis 
ortus cardine, and Host is Herodes impie — since changed into 
Crudelis Herodes Deum. 

St. Thomas Aqutxas, so called from his birth-place, Aquino, 
a small town in the kingdom of Naples, was born of an illustrious 
family in 1227. His education was first committed to the monks 
of the famous Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino, to which 
he was sent at the early age of five years. Prom thence he 
went to Naples, where he studied grammar and philosophy ; and 
there he took the Dominican habit in 1243. It is unnecessary to 
dwell on his after career, or to speak of his great piety, learning, 
and the various illustrious works with which he enriched the 
church. These things have made his name famous throughout 
the world, and procured for him the title of the Angelic Doctor. 
The best known of his works is the Summ, in which he has 
displayed, in the treatment of such a variety of difficult subjects, 
that profound theological knowledge, united with a singular 
perspicuity and precision, which we see in all his works. His 
commentaries on the scripture extend to the following books : 
the booh of Job, the first fifty Psalms, the Canticle of Canticles, 
and the Epistles of St. Paul. Besides these commentaries, he 
composed a catena, or chain, on the four gospels, called the 
catena aurea. It exhibits in a continued series the various inter- 
pretations of the ancient doctors, as well Greek as Latin, together 
with the names of the authors. With respect to the commentaries 
on the epistles of St. Paul, it is to be observed that, with the 



AND OTHER WRITERS 0~N SCRIPTURE. 519 

exception of those on the epistle to the Eomans, the epistle to 
the Hebrews, and the first epistle to the Corinthians, they are 
not immediately from the pen of St. Thomas, hut are made up of 
extracts taken by his scholars from the lectures which he deli- 
vered. From his lectures were also taken, in the same way, the 
commentaries on Isaias, Jeremias, St. Matthew, and St. John, 
which are attributed to him. St. Thomas has made great use of 
the scholastic method of interpretation, and has thrown much 
light on the literal sense of the text. No one is more felicitous 
in adducing parallel passages from other parts of the scripture to 
illustrate that portion of the text which he is explaining. The 
number of St. Thomas's works is prodigious. They make seven- 
teen volumes in folio, and were printed at Venice in 1490; at 
Nuremberg in 1496 ; at Rome in 1570 ; at Venice in 1594 ; and 
at Cologne in 1612. The commentaries on the scripture are 
contained in the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th volumes. 

Euihymitjs Zigabenus, a Greek writer of the twelfth century, 
was a Basilian monk. He wrote commentaries on the Psalms, on 
the Four Gospels, -on the Epistles of St. Paul, and the Catholic 
Epistles. These commentaries profess to be literal, moral, and 
allegorical ; but the learned author dwells particularly on the 
literal sense. It does not appear that the entire of these works 
have been as yet printed. The commentary on the four Gospels, 
which is the principal one, was published by Matthaei, at Leipsic, 
in 1792, three volumes octavo. The commentary on the Psalms 
Avas published with the works of Theophylact. 

Anselm was Dean of Laon, in France, in the early part of the 
twelfth century. He taught theology with great reputation in 
the university of Paris, and afterwards in the diocess of Laon. 
Among his exegetical works, which were taken, for tbe most 
part, from those who preceded him, none attained to greater 
celebrity than a brief commentary on the entire of the Old and 
New Testament, entitled Glossa interlinearis ; which name it 
got because it was inserted between the lines of the Vulgate 
version. It has been printed along with the commentary of 
Nicholas De Lyra, of whom we shall speak afterwards. 

Rupert flourished in the early part of the twelfth century. 
He was a Benedictine monk, and abbot of a monastery of that 
order in the diocess of Cologne. He has commented at consider- 
able length on the greater part of the books of the sacred scrip- 
ture. This author has indulged to an excess in the pursuit of 
the mystical sense. As an aid to the investigation of the literal 
sense, his commentaries on Ecclesiastes and the Gospel of St. 
John are particularly recommended. He often takes occasion 
in these exegetical works to discuss questions of dogmatic theo- 



520 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



logy ; and is censured for having in one place spoken rather 
incorrectly on the Eucharist. But in several other places, and 
particularly in his letters, he explains himself on this mystery 
in the most orthodox and exact manner. His works, which are 
written, of course, in Latin, were printed at Paris in 1638, two 
volumes, folio, and at Venice 1748-52, four volumes, folio. 

Hughes de Saint-Cher, better known by his Latin name 
Hugo he Sancto Caro, was a distinguished Latin commentator 
of the thirteenth century. He got the surname of Saint- Cher 
from having been born near the church of that name, in the 
suburbs of Tienne in France. He belonged to the Dominican 
order; was a doctor of Sorbonne ; and in 1244 was raised to the 
dignity of Cardinal by Innocent VI. He was so renowned for 
wisdom and learning in his day, that in the epitaph which was 
put on his tomb it was said, that wisdom had suffered an eclipse at 
his death. We have had occasion before to speak of this author 
when treating of the divisions of the bible. His most important 
work is the Concordance of the Bible, printed at Cologne, 1684, in 
octavo. By means of this most useful work one can find with- 
out trouble any passage of the scripture which he wants. It is 
easy to perceive how great a service the inventor of it has 
rendered to the theologian, the preacher, in a word to every one 
who is employed in the reading and study of the sacred volume. 
He has written a commentary on the entire scripture, in which 
he explains the fourfold sense of the text, viz., the literal, alle- 
gorical, anagogical, and moral. This commentary goes by the 
name of Postillce, a barbarous Latin word, derived from the cir- 
cumstance of subjoining the explanation after the words of the 
text — post ill a verba textus. The learned cardinal is not diffuse 
on the literal exposition of the text. At the same time he does 
not omit to explain the words and phrases of the Yulgate, partly 
from the old interpreters and partly from himself. The whole 
work occupies eight volumes in folio, which are bound in four. 
Some editions have only six volumes in folio. The work has 
been printed at the following places, and repeatedly at some of 
them : Basal, Venice, Paris, Cologne, and Lyons. The popularity 
of this vast work may give us some idea of the zeal for scriptu- 
ral studies with which Catholics were animated in the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries. 

Laurentius Yalta was born at Piacenza in 1415. He was 
one of those who contributed most to revive the study of classi- 
cal Latin. He distinguished himself at Rome ; but was obliged 
to leave that city on account of his satirical disposition. Having 
gone to Naples where he was welcomed on account of his learn- 
ing, he began to dogmatize on the mystery of the Trinity, on 



A]S T D OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTURE. 



521 



free will, and on vows of continence, as well as on several 
other important points. In punishment of this presumption, 
he was condemned to be whipped. As it was impossible for him 
to remain at Naples after such a humiliation, he returned to 
Borne, where he became reconciled to Pope Nicholas V, and 
procured leave to teach. It is said that before his death, which 
occurred in 1457, he had been promoted to a canonry in the 
church of St. John Lateran. He has left several works, some of 
which are of a most objectionable character. As an expositor of 
scripture he has only written Notes on the New Testament, which 
were first edited by Erasmus. As the object which Valla pro- 
posed to himself was the emendation of the Vulgate, hence, 
these notes are rather philological than explanatory. 

Erasmus (Desiderius), was born at Rotterdam in 1467. At 
the age of seventeen he became a canon regular of St. Augustin ; 
and at the age of twenty-five was elevated to the priesthood by 
the Bishop of Utrecht. He attained to the greatest eminence'^as 
a scholar. No one did more for the revival of classical studies : 
and in a word, as regarded both genius and learning, he was 
the most remarkable man of his times. Popes and princes vied 
with each other in their efforts to attach him to their court ; but 
he appears to have always made study his principal delight, and 
would never undertake any employment which might detach 
him from his books. He composed several works, many of which 
are of an objectionable character. Some are disedifying on 
account of the extravagance and severity of his satire on his 
contemporaries, particularly when he speaks of religious and 
ecclesiastics. In matters of religion, too, he trusted too much 
to his own lights, and thus wandered sometimes from the true 
path. "Wherefore, several of his works were censured by the 
divines of Paris and of Louvain, and have been put on the index 
of the Council of Trent. In fact, in all his works, he is to be 
read with caution. It must be observed, however, that although 
the Reformers made several efforts to attach him to their party, 
they could never succeed : and in several places of his writings 
he shows us that he cordially detested the character of these 
men. To the day of his death he professed himself a child of 
the Catholic and Roman Church. His exegetical works on the 
scripture are a Paraphrase on the New Testament, and the anno- 
tations on his version of the New Testament. As a biblical critic 
and commentator, Erasmus has written many excellent things ; 
but, at the same time, many things with which one must find 
fault. His paraphrase on the New Testament was printed at 
Basil in 1524, folio. It was printed at Berlin, 1777-1780, in 
three volumes octavo. J ohn Le Clerc gave an edition of all his 



522 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS. 



works in ten volumes folio, Leyden, 1703. His Latin version of 
the ]SW Testament, along with his annotations upon it, is 
printed in the sixth volume of this edition. 

Nicholas De Ltra was so called from the place of his 
nativity, Lire, a small town of Normandy, iu the diocese of 
Evreux. He was a Jew by descent, and had commenced to study 
under the Rabbins, when, grace having touched his heart, be 
became a Christian, and took the habit of the Friars Minors in 
the year 1291. He weut afterwards to Paris, where he was 
admitted doctor, and where be continued, for a long period, to 
explain the holy scripture in the great convent of bis order. He 
wrote postillce, or brief commentaries on the whole bible, which 
were afterwards enlarged by Paulus Burgensis, of whom we 
shall speak presently. These postillce of De Lyre became ex- 
ceedingly popular. The work was. in fact, considered essential 
to the right understanding of the sacred books ; whence came 
the saying, Si Lyra non lirasset, ecclesia Dei non saltasset. He 
Lyra was peculiarly well qualified for the task of explaining 
the scripture by his knowledge of the Hebrew language and 
literature. He consulted the Rabbinical commentaries with 
great advantage. Throughout his commentary he has judiciously 
set forth the literal sense, particularly in those books which are 
derived from a Hebrew original. Here and there be dwells 
briefly on tbe mystical sense, and often runs into theological dis- 
quisitions. On the whole, notwithstanding the progress which 
hermeneutical studies have made since his time, the work is 
even still highly esteemed. It was translated from the original 
Latin into French in the beginning of the sixteenth century. 
The original work was printed at Rome in 1472, seven tomes, 
folio. It was very frequently reprinted. The best edition is 
that of Antwerp, 1634, six volumes, folio. 

Rattles Buegexsls, or, Paul of Burgos, so called from the 
city of Burgos in Spain where he was born, and of which he was 
afterwards archbishop, had been a Jew, until, from reading tbe 
summ of St. Thomas, he was converted to the Christian faith. 
After the death of his wife he embraced the ecclesiastical state. 
His great merits soon procured him preferment. He was made 
preceptor to John II, king of Castile; and after passing through 
other dignities was promoted to the archiepiscopal see of Burgos. 
He died in the early part of the fifteenth century. He wrote 
additions to the Postillce of Nicholas De Lyra, a work for which 
he was well qualified by bis early education and subsequent 
studies. He has, to a considerable extent, followed the method 
of De Lyra, although differing from that commentator in his 
views on some passages of the sacred text. 



AND OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTURE. 



523 



Gerson, called by his proper name, John Chwlier, took the 
surname of Gerson from a village in the diocess of Bheiins, in 
France, where he was born in 1363. He devoted himself to 
the study of theology, and, in course of time, was promoted to 
the dignity of canon and chancellor of the church of Paris. 
He assisted at the Council of Constance as ambassador of France, 
where he insisted vehemently on the superiority of the Council 
above the Pope. He acknowledged at the same time, in the 
most precise terms, the pope's primacy of jurisdiction through- 
out the entire church. Gerson has left several works in Latin. 
His exegetical writings on the scripture are the following : 
two lessons on St. Mark, or rather on the beginning of his gospel, 
which contain partly a literal exposition of the words of the evan- 
gelist, and partly allegorical explanations and reflections on 
these words : an exposition of the Penitential Psalms, accompanied 
with a meditation upon them ; which is, in other words, a para- 
phrase of these psalrns, with an application of them to the re- 
pentant sinner : a treatise on the Canticle of Canticles , the object 
of which is to show that the argument of this book turns on the 
love of God : twelve treatises on the Magnificat, in which the 
literal interpretation is given, and along with it, moral applica- 
tions, pious considerations, and mystical and scholastic disqui- 
sitions. The greater part of the Avorks of Gerson were first printed 
at Strasburg in 1488. Dupin published a collection of the 
works of Gerson, in Holland, in 1706, rive vols, folio. There 
are some things in this collection which ought not to be attri- 
buted to Gerson. 

ALPnoNsus Tostatus was born in Spain in the beginning of 
the fifteenth century. He became a doctor of the university of 
Salamanca, was afterwards made Bishop of Avila, and assisted 
at the council of Easil. He died in 1454, at the age of forty, 
renowned for sanctity and learning. He is often cited by the 
name of Abulensis, taken from the Latin name of his diocess. 
He has written very diffuse commentaries in Latin on the fol- 
lowing books of scripture : the Pentateuch, Josue, Judges, Ruth, 
the boohs of Kings and Paralipomenoyi, and the gospel of St. 
Matthew. These commentaries, which fill several folio volumes, 
contain almost innumerable dissertations on matters of philosophy, 
dogmatic theology, casuistry, history, and jurisprudence ; all of 
which are introduced by the author, in connexion with some- 
thing mentioned in the text. Some of these dissertations, as 
one might expect, turn upon useless matters — questions of mere 
curiosity. On the whole, however, these exegetical writings 
display a vast amount of solid learning, which made Bellarmin 



524 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



declare that he was not surprised to find it said of the author in 
his^epitaph : 

" Hie stupor est mundi, qui scibile discutit omne." 

We may indeed admit that Tostatus was a wonder of the world, 
particularly when we compare the brief period of his life with 
the vast extent of his writings. All his works were printed at 
Venice, 1596, in thirteen vols, folio. They were printed again 
at Cologne, 1612, in twenty-seven vols, folio. 

Denis L^ewis of Kikel is better known by his Latin name 
Dionysius Carthusiaxus, that is, Denis the Carthusian. He 
was born at Eikel, in the province of Liege, in the Low Countries. 
Having entered the house of the Carthusians at Euremonde, he 
lived there for forty-eight years. His death occurred in 1471. 
He was remarkable for his piety and learning. His continual 
attachment to contemplation procured for him the title of the 
ecstatic doctor. Pope Eugenius IX, said of him, that the church 
teas happy in having such a son. Several of his spiritual works 
ure considered master-pieces of their kind. He has written com- 
mentaries on the entire scripture, in which he dwells principally 
on the literal sense, the allegorical and topological being only 
occasionally referred to. His works were published at Cologne, 
1549, twenty-one volumes in folio. It is almost unnecessary to 
add that they are written in Latin. 

Marsieitjs Ficintts was a Latin writer of the fifteenth centurv. 
He was born at Florence in 1433, and died in 1499. He was an 
ecclesiastic, held a canonry in Florence, and taught philosophy 
in the university of that city. His learning recommended him 
to the family of the Medici, who became his munificent patrons. 
His works were printed at Basil in 1561, two volumes, folio. 
Among them there is a commentary on scripture, with the 
2 olio wing title : In epistolas B. Fault, ascensus usque ad caelum 
ad Paulum inteUigenclum. But, although this professes to be a 
commentary on the epistles of St. Paul, the author has in reality 
explained only the epistle to the Eomans. This exposition is 
literal, and is manifestly the work of a man who was perfect 
master of the Greek language. 

Jaiies Le Fevre oe Etaples, better known by his Latin 
name, Jacoeus Fabee Staptjeexsis, was born at Etaples, in the 
diocess of Amiens, in France, about the middle of the fifteenth 
century. He made his studies in the university of Paris, where 
he afterwards professed the belles-lettres and philosophy. Le 
Pevre exerted himself strenuously to promote the study of the 
learned languages in the university. After leaving Paris to 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 525 

become grand vicar of the diocese of Afeaux he was blamed for 
being partial to the new doctrines on religion, and thus got into 
various troubles. Before his death, however, he opened his eves 
again to the truth, and died in sentiments of the sincerest attach- 
ment to the church, in 1537. He wrote, in Latin, literal com- 
mentaries on the Psalms, Ecclesiastes, the Gospels, and the Epistles 
of the Apostles. The author was well acquainted with the Greek 
language, and has displayed great learning in these commen- 
taries ; but there is a want of order and method in the work which 
detracts from its utility. 

Besides those commentators on the scripture whom we have 
mentioned, this period also produced other writers, who employed 
theif pen in promoting in various ways the study of the sacred 
volume ; some by translating it into other languages ; some by 
the criticism of the text ; and others, in fine, by elucidating one 
or more of those subjects which are introductory to the explana- 
tion of the sacred text. And some of those commentators also 
whom we have already mentioned have, in addition to their 
exegetical labours, exercised their pen in those other depart- 
ments of biblical study. Alctjin was employed by Charlemagne 
.to give a corrected edition of the Vulgate version, which he did 
by collating the ancient copies. Sr. Isidore of Seville in his 
first book, Be Ecclesiasticis Officii*, has written on the authors of 
the hooks of the Old Testament, on the Septuagint and Vulgate ver- 
sions, on the number of the sacred books, and on the distinction of 
the books into Proto and Deidro-canonical. Berthariijs, abbot of 
Monte Cassino in the ninth century, has left two books on the 
manner of reconciling the seeming contradictions fmnd in the Bible. 
St. Stephen, the third abbot of Citeaux, applied himself to the 
emendation of the Vulgate text in the beginning of the twelfth 
century. The plan which Stephen followed was the same as 
that which Cardinal Hugo De Sancto Caro, in the century 
following, adopted in a similar work ; that was to collate the 
Hebrew, Chaldaic, and ancient Latin codices ; and then, out of 
the various readings of the Vulgate, to place that one in the text 
which appeared to have the best support from these ancient 
witnesses, the others being placed in the margin. Odo, bishop 
of Cambray, who died in the beginning of the twelfth centurv, 
composed, in Latin, a harmony of the Evangelists, under the 
title, In Canones Evangeliorum. It is printed in the Bibliotheca 
Patrum. Richard of St. Victor, Richardus a Sancto Victor e, 
was a Latin writer of the twelfth century, who was illustrious 
for his piety and learning. He was a native of Scotland, and 
became a canon regular in the abbey of St. Victor at Paris. He 
left several works which prove him to have been a most profound 



526 



THE PRINCIPAL COItfliENTATORS, 



theologian and a great master in the spiritual life. Some of his 
works are devoted to the discussion of scriptural subjects, of 
which we may mention the following : a book on some of the 
difficulties of Sacred Scripture, addressed to St. Bernard; a chro- 
nological harmony of the kingdoms of Judea and Israel ; a literal 
explanation of the Vision of Ezechiel respecting the animals and 
wheels ; mystical annotations on the Psalms ; a mystical explana- 
tion of the Canticle of Canticles, Daniel, and the Apocalypse ; two 
booh on Emmanuel, in which the author explains the famous 
prophecy of Isaias regarding the virgin that was to conceive, and 
ably vindicates the Christian exposition of the prophecy against 
the misinterpretation of the Jews. The best edition of this 
writer's works is that which was printed at Rouen in 1650> two 
volumes, folio. Nicholas de Lyra, already mentioned as a com- 
mentator, has written also on the introduction to the study of 
scripture : of this kind is his treatise on the Canonical Boohs of 
Scripture; and his treatise on the Translators of the Bible, in 
which he gives an account of the seventy translators ; then of the 
other Greek translators who came after these ; next, of the 
Hexapla of Origen, and of the Latin version of St. Jerome. 
Marchesini, who was a native of Reggio, and a Franciscan friar, 
was the author of a work on scripture which had great circula- 
tion in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. It was written by 
him about the middle of the fifteenth century, and was intended 
for beginners in the study of scripture. The title of the work is, 
Mammotreetus (or Mammotreptus) sive JExpositio in singula Biblice 
capitula. It may be described as a grammatical exposition of the 
more difficult wgrds of scripture as they are found in the Yulgate. 
The w^ork was printed at Mayence in 1470, folio. It has been 
frequently reprinted. 



CHAPTER III. 

THIRD PERIOD — PROM: THE BEGINNING OF THE SIXTEENTH 
CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 

We have now arrived at the period of that great rebellion 
against the Catholic Church which began with Luther, and of 
which the dire effects continue to the present day. For the 
followers of the so-called reformers are still numerous, but broken 
up even as they were from the first days of the revolt into various 
sects, without any bond of union except their opposition to the 
Catholic Church. These sects have produced their commenta- 
tors, ard other writers on scripture ; and hence we must not 
concluc e this chapter without seme notice of these. We shall 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



527 



then treat of them in their proper place under the general desig- 
nation of Protestant writers on scripture : which is an appro- 
priate designation for them all, inasmuch as it is derived from 
that one point before mentioned, in which alone they agree. 

Section I. — Of the Catholic Commentators. 

John de Gaigny, or Gany, better known by his Latin name 
Gagn^eus, was a native of Paris, and died in 1549. He was a 
doctor of Sorbonne and chancellor of that university. He wrote 
a commentary, or rather brief annotations, on the iSew Testament, 
in which the literal sense is well explained. The author proves 
himself to have been well acquainted with the original languages 
of the scripture. This work was published by Pere de La Haie, 
in his Biblia Magna, five volumes, folio. 

Francis FoREiRO%i© Latin Forebius, was a Dominican friar 
of Lisbon, who attained to great eminence as a theologian. He 
was one of the secretaries of the Council of Trent, and had the 
high honour of being named one of the three theologians who 
were selected to prepare the Catechism of the Council. He died 
in 1581. He deservedly holds a high rank among the inter- 
preters of scripture ; for, besides a new version of Isaias, he com- 
posed commentaries on all the prophets, on Job, the Psalms, 
Proverbs, and the Canticle of Canticles. He published, moreover, 
disquisitions on the gospels. All his woiks display a profound 
acquaintance with theological subjects and great erudition. 

Francis Vatable, Vatablus, was born in a small town of 
Picardy in France, called Gamache. He was appointed by the 
king, Francis I, in the year 1531, professor of Hebrew in the 
royal college w hich was just then founded by that prince. He 
was afterwards made abbot of Bellozant. He was profoundly 
acquainted with the Hebrew and Greek languages. In his lec- 
tures on the scriptures as Hebrew professor, he did not content 
himself with a grammatical exposition of the Hebrew words, but 
gave at the same time a brief and literal commentary on the 
meaning of the text, and that with such clearness and force that 
students flocked from all quarters to hear him. Even Jews 
frequently attended his lectures, and could not but admire his 
learning. This literal exposition of the text extended over a 
a great part of the Old Testament, and was delivered viva voce 
by Vatablus, who never wrote anything himself; but it was 
taken down in writing by several of his pupils ; and from some 
one of these Robert Stephens procured a copy, which he printed 
in 1545 in his edition of Leo Judo's bible. It was found that 
the commentary, or notes of Vatablus, as printed by Stephens, 
had been altered ; and, as it was believed, by Stephens himself ; 
who was then a Calvinist : hence, these notes were condemned 



.528 



THE PRINCIPAL COIT^TEXTATOKS, 



by the faculty of theology at Paris. The Spanish Inquisition 
had the work revised and corrected by the theologians of Sala- 
manca, and then permitted the publication of it in 1584. Since 
that time it has been often reprinted. 

Sebastian Barratries was a Portuguese Jesuit. He was 
born in 1542. He attained to great eminence, both as a writer 
and preacher. Such was the fruit of his sermons that he was 
called the Apostle of Portugal. He died in the odour of sanctity, 
in 1615. Besides other works, he wrote a commentary on the 
concordance of the Gospels, which is much esteemed. Together 
with a sound literal exposition of the entire of the four Gospels, 
this work contains a series of moral reflections on the gospel-text 
which are above all praise ; so appropriate are they, and so full 
of unction. This commentary is writtaiL in Latin, and was 
printed with his other works at Antwerp in 1617, and at Cologne 
in 1628. The commentary is in two folio volumes; the entire 
works being in four volumes. 

Johx Maldonat, Mdldonatus, was born of a noble family in 
Spain, in 1534. He made his studies in Salamanca with great 
distinction ; and having completed the course of study, he taught 
Greek, philosophy, and divinity in that university. After some 
time he went to Rome, and there entered the society of Jesus, in 
1562. In the following year he went to Paris to teach philosophy 
and theology. His fame attracted such a prodigious number of 
scholars, that the room or hail in which he taught would be often 
filled for three hours before the commencement of his lecture ; 
and to satisfy the wishes of those who could not get admission 
into the lecture-room, it was often necessary for him to deliver 
the lesson in the court of the college. His doctrine respecting 
the conception of the Holy Mother of God brought him into 
trouble at Paris. He then retired to Bourges, where he gave 
himself up entirely to the study of the holy scriptures. Pope 
Gregory XIII called him to Pome, to assist in bringing out the 
edition of the Greek bible which was then being prepared under 
the auspices of that pontiff. He remained in Pome until the 
period of his death in 1583. Although he wrote a great deal, 
he published nothing during his lifetime. As a commentator on 
scripture, he wrote a commentary on the four Gospels ; a commen- 
tary on the prophets Jeremias, Baruch, Ezekiel, and Daniel ; and 
scholia on the Psalms, Proverbs, the Canticle of Canticles, Eccle- 
siastes, and Isaias. Besides these commentaries he left notes on 
other parts of the scripture which were never published. The 
first book of his which was published was his commentary on the 
four Gospels, which ^vas printed at Pont-a-lEousson, in 1596. It 
was afterwards printed at Brescia in 1598, at Lyons in 1601, at 



AND OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTERE. 



o29 



Mayence about the same time, and at Paris in 1617 ; and these 
are accounted the best editions of the work. The commentary 
on the prophets was first printed at Lyons in 1609 ; and the 
scholia above mentioned were published along with some other 
pieces by the same author, at Paris, 1677, in one volume, folio. 
Maldonatus was confessedly one of the ablest men who ever 
undertook the exposition of the sacred scripture. He was an 
indefatigable student, well acquainted with the Hebrew and 
Greek languages, and with the writings of the ancient interpre- 
ters ; and he wrote in Latin with facility and elegance. His 
commentary on the Gospels is a masterpiece of exegetical com- 
position. The literal sense is well developed, whilst the bearing 
of the text upon the dogmatical controversies with the sectaries 
is most ably explained and established. His style, when re- 
ferring to the sectaries, is sometimes severe, which made some 
of the Calvinists call him maledicentissimus Maldonatus. But 
even these were forced to admit that he was a man of great 
powers of mind, and vast erudition ; and Richard Simon, who is 
acknowledged even by Protestants to be an impartial critic, 
says, that Maldonatus will appear moderate in his language 
when we compare it with the continual declamations of Calvin 
and Beza against the Eoman church. 

Gasper Saxchez, or Sanctius, was a Spanish Jesuit, and 
professor of sacred scripture at Alcala. Although he resided 
chiefly in this city, he was sent by his order, from time to time, 
to teach the holy scriptures in other cities of Spain. He died at 
Madrid in the year 1628, at the age of eighty-four. He wrote 
excellent commentaries on several of the historical books of the Old 
Testament, on the four greater prophets, on Job, the Canticle of 
Canticles, and the Acts of the Apostles. The author has fully 
and solidly developed the literal sense of the text, without 
neglecting the mystical. His commentaries on Job and Isaias 
are the most esteemed : the last named is one of the best exposi- 
tions which we have of that prophet. 

James Tirix, Jacobus Tirinus, was also a Jesuit. He was 
born at Antwerp in 1580. Having entered the society he be- 
came a very distinguished member of it ; was appointed professor 
of sacred scripture ; was the first superior of the professed house 
at Antwerp, and director of the mission in Holland. He is well 
known as the author of a Latin commentary on the whole bible, 
in two volumes, folio, which has been very often printed. It is 
somewhat more diffuse than the commentary of Menochius ; and 
although less esteemed than the latter work, is yet exceedingly 
useful to those who wish to learn briefly the sense of the text, as 
explain ed by the greater number of the fathers and commentators. 



530 



THE PEIXCIPAX COMMENTATORS, 



Cornelius Tax dex Stees, called by the French La Pierre ; 
but still belter known by his Latin name Corxelius a Lapide, 
is one of the most renowned of all the commentators on scripture. 
He was born in a village of the diocess of Liege, in the Low 
Countries, in the year 1566. At a very early age he determined to 
consecrate himself to God in the religious state, and his love of 
study induced him to prefer the Society of Jesus to any other 
order. Having then entered the society, he soon distinguished 
himself by his progress in the study of the languages of belles- 
lettres, and. above all, of the sacred scripture. Having made 
himself master of the Hebrew and Greek languages, and the 
other helps to the study of the bible, he devoted all his energies 
to that study for a period of forty years. As he informs us him- 
self, he loved solitude, because it was favourable to meditation 
on the law of the Lord ; and he has left us the fruit of that 
meditation in ten folio volumes, in which he has explained the 
entire scripture of the Old and Xew Testament, except the Psalms 
and Job. He was employed for a long time in teaching the scrip- 
ture ; first at Louvain ; and afterwards at Koine, where he died, 
at the age of seventy-one years, in the odour of sanctity. Such, 
indeed, was the idea entertained of his sanctity, that his body 
was buried apart from others, that so it might be distinguished, 
in case of there being question of his beatification. The best 
edition of his commentary is that of Antwerp, of which the 
first volume was printed in 1681. The exposition of the Penta- 
teuch, and that of the epistles of St. Paul, are the most esteemed 
paits of the work. But the entire work was received with the 
highest approval by Catholics, who still justly regard the author 
as cue of their greatest scriptural 'scholars. Superficial readers 
of his commentary take offence at his references to the philosophy, 
which was current in his time ; at his illustrations, taken from 
the natural history of Pliny, and such like sources ; and at his 
frequent allegorical and topological interpretations ; and they 
rush to the conclusion that this writer could not have possessed 
the judgment necessary to give a solid literal exposition of the 
text. Put in this conclusion they are quite mistaken; and of 
this they would soon convince themselves, were they to pay even 
moderate attention to his literal commentary on the text, which 
can be always easily distinguished from those numerous digres- 
sions which he introduces. And those digressions also are never 
without their utility ; for they either agreeably illustrate the 
subject which he basin hand; or they contain solid moral re- 
fit c:ions by which the reader is edified, and the preacher pre- 
pared for the performance of his duty ; or they explain, with 
surpassing clearness and solidity, some dogma of religion, or some 



AND OTHEE, WMTEKS OJJ" SCRIPT UEE. 



531 



interesting point of scholastic theology. Then the quotations 
from the fathers, which occupy so much of the work, and are 
always appropriate, will be found to throw great light, either 
on the literal meaning of the text, or on the moral lesson which 
it suggests. In a word, the work is a complete treasure of that 
knowledge which fits out the ecclesiastic for all his duties ; and 
that it deserves to rank high as a literal commentary appears 
from the great use which has been made of it by Menochius, (of 
which we shall speak just now,) in that work, which, as a brief 
literal exposition of the entire scripture, is as yet unequalled, 
and will never be surpassed. 

John Stephen Mexocchio, in Latin Menochius, was born at 
Pavia in 1576. His father, James Menochius, was by far the 
most celebrated lawyer of his day in Italy, and is still well known 
by his learned works. He paid great attention to the education 
of his son, who, at the age of seventeen years, embraced the 
religious state among the Jesuits. He soon distinguished him- 
self in the order by his learning and piety. He taught with 
great applause ; and held the first offices in the colleges and 
provinces of Italy. His death occurred in Eome, at the age of 
eighty years. The scripture was his favourite study, and the 
several learned works which he has left are all devoted to the 
illustration of it. As a commentator, he has written on the 
entire scripture. His commentary is literal and brief; but it 
was received with the greatest applause, and continues still to be 
regarded with the same favour by the most judicious critics. Of 
course, it could not be expected that a work comprised within 
such narrow limits would not often fall short of removing all 
obscurity, as regards the meaning of certain passages of the scrip- 
ture ; and if it had been accompanied in many places with a full 
paraphrase of the text, its value would have been greatly en- 
hanced ; but taking it even as it came from the hands of the 
learned author, it is a most valuable help to the understanding 
of the bible. All the works of Menochius are in Latin. The 
best edition of his commentary is that given by Tournemine, 
Paris, 1719, two volumes, folio. The second volume contains 
tracts and dissertations on the scripture, by several authors. 
These, which are called Father Tournemine^ s Dissertations, are 
greatly esteemed. Tournemine' s edition was followed by those 
who brought out the work at Avignon, 1768, four volumes, 
quarto. An edition of this commentary was printed, for the use 
of the students of Maynooth, by Pitzpatrick, Dublin, 1814, three 
volumes, quarto. This edition was taken, word for word, from 
the Avignon edition of 1768 ; but, on account of the expense of 
printing Tournemine's Dissertations, they were left out, and the 



532 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



prolegomena of Duhamel substituted for them. It is much to be 
regretted that this edition is almost out of print. 

Lewis Lippoalan was a Venetian, and a man eminent for his 
learning and piety. He was a universal scholar, profoundly 
versed in the languages ; in history, sacred and profane ; but, above 
all, in theology. He was employed in the most important affairs 
of the church. Julius III named him one of the three presi- 
dents of the Council of Trent. Paul IY sent him as nuncio into 
Poland, and afterwards made him Bishop of Hodon, then of 
Verona, and finally of Bergamo. He died in 1559. He pub- 
lished several books. Among the rest a catena of the Greek 
and Latin fathers upon Genesis, Exodus, and the ten first 
Psalms. This compilation is much admired on account of the 
judicious manner in which it is made. The passages are arranged 
in chronological order ; the literal exposition of each portion of 
the sacred text is first given ; then the difference of the Hebrew 
and Greek, if such there be, is marked; finally, the mystical 
interpretation is given ; and the author cites the work and chap- 
ter from which each passage in his catena is taken. The catena 
on Genesis was printed at Paris in 1546 ; that on Exodus in the 
same place in 1550 ; and that upon the Psalms at Pome in 1585. 

Emmanuel Sa was a native of Portugal, and a Jesuit. He 
was particularly distinguished as a preacher of the Word. He 
was also eminent as a theologian and a scriptural scholar ; and 
taught with applause at Coimbra and at Rome. He died in 
1596 at Arona in the Milanese, in his sixty-sixth year. He has 
left, in Latin, scholia on the four Gospels, which were first printed 
at Ant werp in 1596 ; and. notes on the entire scripture, first printed 
at the same place in 1598. Sa's notes are literal and judicious. 

Cobnelius Jajssex, Bishop of Ghent, better known by his 
Latin name Jansenius Gandavensis, was born at Hulst, in Plan- 
ners, in 1510. and died Bishop or Ghent in 1576. Having gone 
through his first studies at Ghent, and finished his course of 
pniiosophy at Louvain, he learned the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin 
languages, being persuaded that they were necessary for the 
perfect understanding of the holy scriptures, to the study of 
which he had resolved to apply himself. He taught divinity for 
tweive years in the abbey of Tongerloon, of the Premonstraten- 
sian order ; and during that time he composed his Evangelical 
Concord, with a commentary on the text, which he had read in 
lectures to the canons-regular of that abbey. Afterwards, he 
took his doctor's degree at Louvain, and was then sent by Philip 
II to the Council of Trent, on his return from which he was 
named Bishop of Ghent. This author is universally acknow- 
ledged to be one ox the best commentators that we have on the 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE, 



533 



sacred scripture. Besides his famous work, the Evangelical 
Concord, with the commentary on it, he has left a paraphrase on 
the Psalms, with very copious notes, which was printed at 
Lou vain in 1569; and also annotations on the Proverbs, Eccle- 
siasticus, the Canticles, and Wisdom. These annotations, along 
with the commentary on the Psalms, were printed at Lyons in 
1686, and afterwards at Antwerp. The Concordia Evangelica 
has gone through numerous editions. The harmony or chrono- 
logical arrangement of the text of the Gospels was considered 
the hest that had appeared till that time ; and the copious com- 
mentary on the text is justly regarded as a model of exegetical 
writing. Although he professes to explain only the literal sense 
of the scripture, he yet, when the occasion presents itself, notices 
moral and mystical senses for the benefit of preachers. He un- 
folds the sense of a passage with wonderful clearness, and although 
diffuse, never fatigues the reader. The explanation of the Lord's 
Prayer in this commentary on the Gospels may be referred to as 
a favourable specimen of his style ; and it may be safely said of 
it, that in all the attempts to paraphrase this divine prayer it 
has never been equalled. All the commentaries of Jansenius are 
written in Latin ; and the author has been singularly fortunate 
in this, that the general character of his writings has never been 
referred to except in terms of praise. 

Gasper Contarlni, Contarinus, was a Venetian. The nobility 
of his family and his own acquirements recommended him to the 
notice of the Venetian Republic, by which he was sent as 
ambassador to the court of the Emperor Charles V. He was 
created a cardinal in 1535, and died in 1542, at the age of fifty- 
nine. He composed several treatises, in Latin, on various sub- 
jects — philosophical, theological, and political. He is classed 
among the commentators on scripture on account of his scholia on 
St. Paul's Epistles, which are considered valuable. These anno- 
tations are brief and literal; nor does the author undertake to 
explain every passage ; but wherever he remarks upon the mean- 
ing of the text he does it with ability and judgment. All his 
works were printed at Paris in 1571, two volumes, folio. 

James Sadolet, Sadoletus, was a native of Xlodena. His 
father was an eminent lawyer, and he superintended the educa- 
tion of his son at Perrara, where he himself was professor or 
law. The young Sadolet having great parts, and an inclination 
for learning, soon became perfectly acquainted with the Greek 
and Latin languages, and a great proficient in philosophy. Hav- 
ing gone to Home he soon fell under the notice of Leo X, who 
was a great patron of merit. The Pope made him his secretary, 
and afterwards prevailed upon him, not without much difficulty, 



534 



THE PRINCIPAL CCTBPIEIfTATOBS, 



to accept the bishopric of Carpentras. Pope Paul III sent him 
to Prance as nuncio, and he acquitted himself so well in that 
employment, that in recompense of his merit the Pope created 
him cardinal in 1534. He died at Eome in 1547, at the age of 
seventy-one. He was one of the most accomplished scholars of 
his day ; and attained to distinction as a theologian, a philsopher, 
an orator, and a poet. He has left several works, written in 
Latin, and in a style which for purity and elegance rivals that 
of the best ancient writers ; among the rest a commentary on the 
Epistle to the Romans, in the form of a dialogue between himself 
and his brother. In this work he compares the Vulgate with 
the Greek, whilst in the interpretation of the meaning of the 
apostle he follows as his principal guides, St. Chrysostom and 
Theophylact : he also discusses at considerable length, and clears 
up. the doctrines regarding justification, predestination, and free- 
will, which were then freely impugned by the innovators. This 
work was printed at Lyons in 1536. This was a reprint from an 
earlier edition at Basil. Sadolet also wrote a moral exposition of 
the fiftieth and ninety- third Psalms, which was printed at Lyons 
in 1528. and at Mayence in 1607. 

Andrew Hash's was born in the Low Countries in 1516. 
He was unquestionably one of the most learned men of the six- 
teenth century. After making great proficiency in the study of 
philosophy and jurisprudence he became secretary to the Bishop 
of Constance ; and after the death of that prelate he was sent in 
quality of agent to Eome, where he availed himself of his oppor- 
tunities to perfect himself in the knowledge of the Syriac lan- 
guage. He always continued a layman. He ended his days in 
sentiments of true Christian piety at the age of fifty- seven years. 
ATasius. besides having mastered several of the living languages, 
was well acquainted with Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic, and 
Syriac ; he was well versed in ancient history and geography ; 
and no one of his time surpassed him. or perhaps equalled him, 
in sacred criticism. He wrote several works in Latin : among 
the rest a commentary on the book of Josue, entitled Josuce Im- 
peratoris Historic, illustrate, atone explicate. It was printed at 
Antwerp. 1574, folio; and has been also inserted in the Criiici 
Sacri. This work has been always regarded as a model of scrip- 
tural interpretation. In addition to his other qualifications the 
author had the advantage, when writing it, of possessing the 
famous Syriac manuscript written in 616, which is the only 
known manuscript that has preserved to our time Origen's 
Hexaplar edition of Josue, and of other historical books of the 
Old Testament. This manuscript was translated, word for word, 
h orn a Greek exemplar corrected by the hand of Eusebius. 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



535 



Cornelius Jansen, Bishop of Ypres, Jansenius Yprensis, is 
too well known to require any lengthened notice here. One of 
the most lamentable heresies that has disturbed the Christian 
world is denominated from him. It does not appertain to this 
place to discuss the extent to which he himself may have been 
involved in the guilt of formal heresy ; he only comes before us 
as the author of commentaries on the scripture. Jansenius was 
a native of Holland, where he was born in 1585 ; he took the 
degree of doctor in divinity at Lou vain in 1619; was appointed 
professor of sacred scripture in 1630 ; and, finally, made Bishop 
of Ypres in 1636, two years before his death. He composed in 
Latin commentaries on the Gospels, on the Pentateuch, on Pro- 
verbs, JEcclesiastes, Wisdom, Habacuc, and Sophonias. These 
commentaries have been often printed, and the author is consi- 
dered to have, generally speaking, explained well the sense of 
the sacred writer. 

Claudius D'Espence, Espencceus, was born in France, in the 
city of Chalons-sur-Marne, in the year 1511. He became at an 
early age rector of the University of Paris ; and was highly dis- 
tinguished among the doctors of the Sorbonne by his judgment 
and erudition. He was the author of several works, some of 
which are written in French. He wrote in Latin with a remark- 
able dignity and elevation of style ; and among other works in 
that language he has left commentaries on the epistles of St. 
Paul to Timothy and Titus. In these he has explained well the 
literal sense of the text ; besides enlarging in a series of disser- 
tations, or digressions, as he calls them, upon a variety of matters 
suggested by the text. These dissertations are highly interest- 
ing, as, in them, the author has brought together from the 
ancient writers many things bearing upon several questions of 
hierarchical discipline, as also upon several points of dogmatic 
and moral theology. These commentaries, which had been first 
printed during the lifetime of Espencseus, were reprinted at 
Paris in 1619, in one volume, folio, which, along with these, 
contains all his other Latin works. 

Benedict Pereira, in Latin Pererius, was a native of 
Yalencia in Spain. He entered among the Jesuits in his seven- 
teenth year. He devoted himself to the study of the sciences of 
language, and, most of all, to that of sacred scripture. He was 
one of the most distinguished professors which the society had 
in Eome. In that city he died, in 1610, at the age of seventy- 
five. We have from him Latin commentaries on Genesis and on 
Daniel. The author shows himself well acquainted with the 
sense of the text, and learned in his digressions ; and although 



536 



THE PRIXCTP1E CJOMMEITTATOBSr. 



his commentaries are exceedingly diffuse, they have been re- 
peatedly printed. 

Francis Toeet, Toletus. "was born at Cordova, in Spain, in 
the year 1532. He had for professor in Salamanca the celebrated 
Domioick Soto, who called him a prodigy of genius. Having 
entered the society of the Jesuits he was sent to Eome, where he 
taught philosophy and theology ; and was appointed by Pope 
Pius V preacher to the papal court. He was employed by the 
succeeding popes in several important affairs ; and was raised by 
Clement YIII to the dignity of cardinal in 1594. He was a 
man of rare perfection of character ; displaying consummate 
ability in arduous public employments ; and. at the same time, 
devoted to the pursuit of learning ; whilst his virtue and piety 
shone conspicuous above all his other merits. He wrote Latin 
commentaries on the following parts of the scripture: — On the 
gospel of St. John. Lyons, 1614, in folio ; on the twelve first chapters 
of St. Luke, Eome, 1600, in folio ; on the epistle of St. Paid to 
the Romans, Eome, 1602. in quarto. These commentaries are 
diffuse : several questions of divinity are discussed in them ; 
whilst the literal sense is well explained. He has copious re- 
ferences to the opinions of the fathers, among whom St. Augus- 
tine was a favourite authority with him. 

J AiTES Eoxererius was born at Dinant, a town in the Low 
Countries, in 1534. He was received among the Jesuits in 1592. 
He was employed to teach philosophy and theology at Douay ; 
and having been appointed professor of sacred scripture and 
Hebrew in the same city, he continued, for a long time, to dis- 
charge the duties of that office with great distinction. It is 
obvious from his writings that he was deeply versed in sacred 
geography, chronology, and sacred criticism. Eesides his work 
on the introduction to the sacred scripture, he wrote a commen- 
tary on the Pentateuch, printed at Antwerp, 1625. in folio ; also a 
commentary on Josue, Judges, and Ruth, printed at Paris, 
1631, in folio. He wrote on several other books of the scrip- 
ture, but these commentaries have not been printed. His 
works are in Latin, and all who have attentively examined 
hem are unanimous in bestowing the highest praises on 
them. His commentaries are excellent. He never omits to 
explain the words and the sense of his text ; and in doing 
this he judiciously follows a middle course, avoiding the 
too great brevity of some, and the over-diffuseness of 
others. 

Alphoxsus Saemerox was born at Toledo, in Spaim He 
studied at Alcala, where he made himself master of the Latin, 



AND OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTURE . 



537 



Greek, and Hebrew languages. He then went to Paris to study 
philosophy and divinity ; and he there joined St. Ignatius, who 
was at Paris, laying the foundation of his society. His after 
career justified the hopes which Ignatius conceived of him. He 
preached with great applause in the principal cities of Italy ; 
and laboured in the mission in Prance, Germany, Poland, the 
Low Countries, and Ireland : and he assisted at the three different 
meetings of the Council of Trent. When he was no longer able 
to bear the fatigue of preaching, he retired into the college of 
the society at Naples, and spent there the remainder of his days 
in composing books for the service of the church. His death 
occurred in 1585, at the age of sixty-nine. His works upon the 
scripture were printed at Madrid in 1601 and 1602, and at 
Cologne in 1604. They make sixteen volumes in folio. One 
volume is taken up with prolegomena upon the whole bible, and 
the other fifteen volumes are a commentary on the New Testa- 
ment. But this very diffuse commentary is rather a series of 
theological tracts than a commentary upon the scripture. As a 
theologian the author shows himself learned and profound. 

Nicholas Serarttjs, another learned Jesuit, was a native of 
Lorraine. He resided for a long time at Mayence, where he 
taught philosophy and theology. It was in that city that he 
died, in 1609. He composed several learned works in Latin ; 
amongst the rest, prolegomena on the bible, and a commentary 
on a great part of the Old Testament. He was a man of great 
erudition, as sufficiently appears from his prolegomena ; and as a 
commentator, he possessed all the qualities necessary for a good 
interpreter of the scripture. He was well acquainted with the 
Greek and Hebrew languages. He had devoted much time to the 
study of the text, and had made himself familiar with the style 
of the sacred writers. He could also turn to good account the 
works of the Rabbins, as he showed in his disputes with Drusius 
and Scaliger. His commentary was published at Mayence, in 
1611, in folio. All his works fill several folio volumes. Baronius, 
in his Annals, calls him the light of the church of Germany ; and 
Joseph Scaliger, who was not fond of paying compliments to an 
adversary, could not help styling him Jesuitam docti&simum. 

Prancis Rlbera was born at Villa-Castile, in Spain, in 1514. 
He was educated at Salamanca, where he particularly applied 
himself to the study of the sacred scripture. Having been 
ordained priest, he determined to embrace the religious state, 
and was received among the Jesuits in his 33rd year. His 
superiors ordered him to teach the scriptures at Salamanca, 
which he did with great distinction, for sixteen years ; at the 
end of which time he prepared his commentaries on the scripture 



538 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMNETATORS, 



for publication. He died at Salamanca in 1591. Ribera's com- 
mentaries are written in Latin, and are greatly esteemed. One 
is on the twelve minor prophets, printed at Cologne, 1599, in folio ; 
another is on the gospel of St. John, Lyons, 1623, in folio : and 
a third on the epistle to the Hebrews, Cologne, 1600, in 8vo. 

John Mariana was born at Talavera, in Spain, in 1537 : 
and in 1554 he entered among the Jesuits, and soon acquired a 
high reputation for learning. He was well acquainted with the 
belles-lettres ; with Greek and Hebrew ; with theology, and 
history —both ecclesiastical and profane; and he taught with 
applause at Rome, in Sicily, at Paris, and in Spain. He died at 
Toledo in 1624. He wrote many works ; among the rest a series 
of Latin scholia on the bible. These scholia, which are very 
concise, have been always highly esteemed. They have been 
repeatedly printed. During the lifetime of the author they were 
printed at Madrid, 1619, and at Paris, 1620; both editions in 
folio. 

Francis Lucas oe Bhuges, Lucas Brugensis, was a licentiate 
in theology of the university of Louvain, and dean of the church 
of St. Omer. He died in 1619, at the age of seventy years. He 
was a perfect master of the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, and 
Chaldaic languages ; he had devoted much time to the study of 
the scripture, and was confessedly one of the greatest proficients 
in biblical criticism which that age, so fruitful in scholars, pro- 
duced. Certainly Eichard Simon, who is a severe critic on this 
class of writers, is loud in his praises of Lucas Brugensis. He 
wrote a ^commentary on the four Gospels ; besides a number of 
opuscula on the scripture, particularly on the state of the Yulgate 
Latin text, all of which have been often printed. A beautiful 
edition, containing the commentary on the Gospels, and these 
opuscula, was published at Antwerp, 1712, five tomes, folio. 
Lucas Brugensis wrote also other works, beside those on the 
sacred scripture. What gave occasion to him to write his com- 
mentary on the Gospels was a request made of him by Plantin, 
the celebrated printer of Antwerp, to write a series of scholia on 
the New Testament, after the manner of Yatable's notes on the 
Old. This he undertook ; but the work grew in his hands to an 
extent which justified him in giving to it the name of a com- 
mentary on the Gospels. And a commentary it is, of no ordinary 
merit. The author, keeping in mind his original intention of 
writing scholia, or notes, is careful to avoid great diffuseness. 
He explains concisely the literal sense, illustrating it by frequent 
quotations from the Greek and Latin fathers, and some from the 
modern writers. He sets down in his book the Greek text and 
Latin Vulgate, in parallel columns, and he never fails to remark 



AXD OTHEE WKITEKS ON SCRIPTURE, 



539 



upon the discrepancy which is sometimes found between them. 
He often refers to the Syriac version. He seldom enters on a 
theological discussion, unless where it serves to clear up the 
meaning of the text. His principal study is to make out the 
proper signification of words "in which," says Richard Simon, 
" he usually succeeds, because he had a perfect knowledge of 
criticism and of grammar." All the works of Lucas Brugensis 
on the scripture are in Latin. 

William Hessels Van Est, better known by his Latin name 
JEstius, was born at Gorcum, in Holland, in 1542. He took the 
degree of doctor in divinity at Louvain in 1580. He afterwards 
went to Douay, where he was appointed superior of the seminary ; 
and so great was his reputation that, whilst holding that office, 
he was made at the same time professor of theology, provost of 
the church of St. Peter, and chancellor of the university. He died 
in Douay at the age of seventy-one, bearing with him to the 
grave the reputation not alone of great learning, but also of 
exalted piety. Benedict XIV styles him doctor fundatissimus. 
His commentary on the Master of the Sentences exhibits him to 
us as a most able and learned theologian ; whilst all have agreed 
to place him in the very highest class of scriptural commentators. 
His exegetical works on the scripture are the following ; a com- 
mentary on the epistles of St. Paul and the Catholic epistles, pub- 
lished at Rouen, 1709, three tomes, folio: notes on the difficult 
passages of the sacred scripture, Douay, 1623, in folio; and in a 
more ample edition at Antwerp in 1699. The commentary <>n 
the epistles is considered much superior to the latter work, which, 
notwithstanding this inferiority, has been always highly prized 
for its clearness and solidity. It is much to be regretted that 
this author adopted such extreme views on the questions 
respecting efficacious grace and predestination. He is everywhere, 
indeed, strictly orthodox. But, having been a disciple of Baius, 
although he embraced none of the erroneous views of his 
master, his mind appears to have got such a leaning to the severe 
opinion on these points, that he has carried it to the utmost 
limits permitted by strict orthodoxy. AVith this sole drawback, 
however, it must be admitted that his work on the epistles is a 
perfect model of a complete scriptural commentary. His critical 
acumen appears in the observations which he makes upon the 
common Greek text, as the occasion presents itself in the course 
of his commentary. In his day but few Greek MSS. had been 
collated, as compared with the great number which have been 
since examined ; now there is scarcely a case in which the con- 
jectures of this able critic have not been put beyond doubt by 



540 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATOR?, 



this extensive collation of the manuscripts. We have only to 
observe, in conclusion, that all the writings of Estius are in 
Latin. 

Lewis Alcasar was a Jesuit. He was born at Seville, in 
Spain, in 1554, and died in that city in 1613. He had taught, 
with distinction, philosophy and theology, and was the author of 
several learned works. But the work which has acquired the 
greatest fame for him is an ample commentary on the Apocalypse, 
in two volumes, folio. It was printed, along with his other 
works, at Antwerp, in 1614, and several editions of it have 
appeared since. This author was the first to point out the con- 
nexion between the apocalyptic prophecy and the history of the 
first ages of the church ; an idea which has been received with 
great favour by the learned men who came after him, parti- 
cularly by Eossuet, who has made great use of the commentary 
of Alcasar. 

John Pineda, also a Spaniard, and a native of Seville, took 
the religious habit among the Jesuits in 1572. He taught philo- 
sophy and theology in several colleges, and devoted himself 
particularly to the study of the sacred scripture. To facilitate 
his progress in this study he learned the oriental languages. 
After a distinguished career, he died, greatly regretted, at the 
age of eighty, in 1637. Besides some historical works, written 
in the Spanish language, he has left, in Latin, the following 
w r orks on Scripture : a commentary on the booh of Job ; a commen- 
tary on Ecclesiastes ; Prcelectio Sacra in Cantica Canticorum ; and 
eight books de rebus Salomonis. The author has displayed in 
these works a vast erudition. The best known among them is 
the commentary on Job ; because Pineda on Job, and Lorinus on 
the Psalms, are generally sought after by those who wish to 
complete the commentary of Cornelius a Lapide, who has not 
written on either of these books. This commentary on Job is 
contained in two volumes, folio. 

Paul Sherlock: was a native of Waterford, in Ireland. 
Having taken the religious habit among the Jesuits, he acquired 
great distinction, even in that illustrious order, as a biblical 
scholar, and was made rector of the Irish college in Salamanca. 
He died in 1646. He has left, in Latin, a diffuse and learned 
commentary on the Canticle of Canticles. It is entitled Anteloquia 
in Salamonis Canticum Canticorum, three volumes, folio, Lyons, 
1633-40. This work was received with great approbation, as 
appears by the several laudatory addresses to the author printed 
in the commencement of the first volume. We may observe 
here that |Our distinguished countryman was the author of a 



AND OTHER WRITERS SCRIPTURE. 541 

learned work on biblical archaeology, also in Latin, entitled 
Antiquitatum Hehraicarum dioptra, seu derepublica LLebrceorum et 
de antiquitatibus biblicis, folio, Lyons, 1651. 

' John Lorin, Lorinus, was also a Jesuit. He was born at 
Avignon, in 1559. He became eminent for his learning, and 
taught theology with great distinction at Paris, Rome, Hilan, &c. 
He died at Dole, in France, in 1634. He wrote Latin commen- 
taries on Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, the Psalms, Eccle- 
siastes, Wisdom, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Catholic epistles. 
Throughout these commentaries, his profound acquaintance with 
the Hebrew and Greek languages everywhere appears. His 
erudition also is immense. No subject comes amiss to him, 
whether it turns upon history, dogma, or the discipline of the 
church. For the reason just now mentioned when speaking of 
Pineda, the commentary of Lorinus on the Psalms is the best 
known of his exegetical works. It has been repeatedly printed ; 
and is contained in three volumes, folio. 

Bernard Lamy was a priest of the French Oratory. He was 
born at Mans, in France, in the year 1645. Having been em- 
ployed to teach philosophy, which he did with great distinction 
in several colleges of his congregation, he zealously espoused the 
advocacy of the opinions of Descartes. This raised up a host of 
enemies against him ; and at last he was deprived of his chair, 
and banished to Grenoble. The Bishop of Grenoble, who was at 
that time Cardinal Le Camus, made him professor of theology in 
his seminary. It was then that Lamy began to prepare the 
materials for the works which he afterwards published on the 
sacred scripture. He continued to devote himself assiduously to 
the duties of his state ; and died at the age of seventy years, 
greatly regretted as a most amiable, virtuous, and learned man. 
His works on scripture are, first, Apparatus Biblicus, an intro- 
duction to the holy scriptures in French, quarto. This work has 
been always highly esteemed. Second, Be Talemaculo foederis, 
de sancia civitate Jerusalem et de Tempo ejus, folio, Paris, 1720. 
This is a very learned treatise, in Latin, on the Tabernacle, and 
on the city and temple of Jerusalem. Third, a Harmony of the 
Gospels, in Latin, Paris, 1689, duodecimo. This chronological 
arrangement of the Gospels by Lamy has not been so well re- 
ceived as the following work : Fourth, A Latin commentcvry on 
the harmony of the four Evangelists, Paris, 1609, two volumes, 
quarto. This last work, which entitles the author to rank among 
the commentators on scripture, displays great learning and ability. 
At the same time, Lamy has put forward views on some points 
of the gospel history which are quite untenable, and which in- 



542 THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 

volved him in long disputes with some of the learned theologians 
of his time. 

Robert Bellarauust is a name too well known to require any 
lengthened notice here. His controversies have procured for him 
an imperishable fame. He was born in 1542, in Tuscany; be- 
came a Jesuit at the age of eighteen ; was afterwards promoted 
to the dignity of cardinal, and made Archbishop of Capua. After 
a life employed in rendering the most illustrious services to the 
church, this truly great man, not more distinguished for his 
learning than his piety, died in the seventy-ninth year of his age, 
in the reputation of great sanctity. Besides his controversies he 
wrote several other works in Latin ; among the rest, a commentary 
on the Psalms, which has been always highly esteemed by the 
best judges. The plan which the learned author follows is : to 
explain the meaning of the words according to the Hebrew text, 
and the Septuagint and Vulgate versions ; and, at the same time, 
to give the full sense of the Psalmist, whether there be question 
of an historical reference to the past, of a prophetical description 
of Christ and the church, or of moral exhortation. 

Paul Pezron w r as a native of France, and a doctor of the 
Sorbonne. He nourished in the latter part of the seventeenth 
century. He was gifted with a prodigious memory, and was 
indefatigable in the pursuit of knowledge ; hence he became 
remarkable for his erudition, particularly for his intimate ac- 
quaintance with the historical monuments of antiquity. His 
name is best known in connexion with a volume published in 
Paris in 1690, in which he undertakes to defend the chronology 
of the Septuagint against that of the Hebrew text of the bible. 
He there assigns a greater antiquity to the world than any 
previous chronoiogist had done. The work involved him in con- 
troversy with Martianay and Le Quien, who came out against it. 
Pezron has written a very useful work on the confirmation 
which the gospel history derives from Jewish and Roman history, 
two volumes, duodecimo, 1696. We have also from him a literal 
and historical commentary on the Prophets, duodecimo, 1693. This 
work throws great light on the history of the kings of Juda and 
of Israel, as the author has taken great pains to make out the 
chronological order of the prophecies. This commentary is 
written in the French language. 

James Benigxtjs Bosstjet, the illustrious Bishop of Meaux, 
requires no further notice here than a simple reference to his 
writings as a commentator on the scripture. He has, then, illus- 
trated by his annotations the Psalms, the books of Solomon, the 
book of Wisdom, and Ecclesiasxicus : and he has set forth in a 



AND OTHETt WEITEES ON SCRIPTUEE. 543 

brilliant light that interpretation of the Apocalypse, according to 
which the book has reference to the conduct and fate of Pagan 
Rome. These are the writings which justify us in ranking 
Bossuet among the commentators on scripture. As to the rest, 
suffice it to say, that this illustrious man was born at Dijon in 
1627, and that after having filled the world with his fame as a 
theologian, an orator, a historian — the model of a Christian bishop 
in his life and conduct among his flock, and the champion of 
orthodoxy against the innovators of these latter times, he died in 
1704, in the seventy- seventh year of his age. 

Lewis Ellies Dtj Pin was born at Paris in 1657. He entered 
the ecclesiastical state, and was admitted a doctor of Sorbonne 
in 1684. He died in 1719. He was the author of several works ; 
of which the best known is Bibliotheque universale des Auteurs 
Ecclesiastiques, in three volumes, folio, which has been translated 
into English. That Dupin was a man of great learning is un- 
questionable ; but that he was remarkable for his perverse views, 
and proceedings upon certain occasions, is equally notorious. 
However, as a commentator on scripture he has written so little, 
that we may fairly excuse ourselves for not going into the details 
of his life. Pie has only explained the book of Psalms in a series 
of annotations having reference to the literal sense. The work, 
which is in Latin — Liber Psalmoruiu cam notis — is contained in 
one volume, octavo. 

John Baptist Dtj Hamel was born in Normandy, in 1624. 
At the age of nineteen he entered the Erench Oratory ; and after 
ten years spent in the congregation he left it to become parish 
priest. In 1663 he was promoted to the dignity of chancellor 
of the church of Bayeux. He lived to the age of eighty-two 
years. During his life he had been devoted to philosophical 
and theological studies ; and he composed a great many works 
on natural and moral philosophy and theology in the Latin 
language, in which he wrote with facility and elegance. In 
1701 he published commentaries on the Psalms : in 1703 he pub- 
lished annotations on the boohs of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus ; and 
in 1706 — the year of his death- — was published his great work 
on the scripture, at Paris, in two volumes, folio, entitled JBiblia 

Sacra Vulgatce editionis una cum selectis annotationibus ex 

optimus quibusque Interpretibus excerptis, prolegomenis, novis 
Tabulis Chronoloyicis, Historicis, et Geograplucis illustrata. The 
work is everything which its title imports. AVe have in it a 
carefully printed copy of the Latin Yulgate, and a series of notes 
well selected and arranged. The prolegomena treat briefly on 
the canon and inspiration of the holy scriptures, and on their 
preservation to our times ; on the authority and various editions 



544 



THE PK1XCJPAL COMMENTATORS, 



of the Hebrew text, and ancient versions ; and on the exposition 
of the bible. There is subjoined a short chronological and geo- 
graphical appendix, in which the weights, measures, and money 
of the Hebrews are discussed. 

Natalis Alexander was born at Rouen, in 1639. He took 
the Dominican habit in 1655 ; was successively professor of 
philosophy and of theology in his Order ; and took the degree of 
doctor in the Sorbonne, in 1675 He died at Paris at the age of 
eighty-six years. The theological faculty of Paris assisted at his 
funeral. Ben edict XIII always styled him his master ; although 
some of his works had been proscribed in 1684 by a decree of 
the Roman Inquisition, against which J^atalis defended himself 
modestly, but yet with dignity and force. In 1704, in an evil 
hour, he subscribed the famous case of conscience,* and was 
banished to Chatellerault ; but having retracted, he was recalled. 
His principal w T ork is the well known ecclesiastical history of 
the Old and New Testament. He wrote also a course of dog- 
matic and moral theology. As a commentator on the scripture 
he has explained the four gospels, all the epistles of St. Paul, and 
the seven Catholic epistles. This commentary, which is written in 
Latin, professes to be literal and moral. It was printed at Paris 
in 1/03 and 1710, two volumes folio. The work exhibits that 
learning and research for which the author was so remarkable. 

Bernard in de Peqtjigny, Bernard inusa Piconio, so called from 

* The case of conscience here mentioned appertains to the history of 
the proceedings in the cause of the Jansenists, in France, in the early 
part of the last century. The great text book of these heretics was the 
work, written by Jansenius, bishop of Ypres, entitled Augustinus. The 
errors of this book are epitomized in the five propositions, known as the 
Jive propositions o f Jansen ius. When these propositions had been solemnly 
condemned by the dogmatic decree of the pope, then the Jansenists had 
recourse to the distinction between jus and factum, or between the fa 10 and 
the fact. They admitted that the dogmatic decree was infallible as re- 
garded the character of the doctrine enunciated in the five propositions : 
this they called the question of la w. But as to the fact, by which they 
meant the attribution of these propositions to the book of Jansenius, they 
dunied that the decree was infallible as regarded this question ; and they 
contended that notwithstanding the decree, it was still lawful to hold that 
the five propositions were not contained in the book of Jansenius. Driven 
from thia position, the J ansenists had recourse to various shifts : among 
the rest, they proposed the following case of conscience : Whether or not 
a clergyman was to be refused absolution, who should declare that he condemned 
the Jive propositions as regarded the question of law ; but that as to the fact, 
or the attribution of th ese five propositions to the book of Jansenius, he though t 
that a religious silence teas sufficient. The Jansenists, of course, decided 
this case in the negative ; and for this decision they found means to pro 7 
cure the approbation of forty doctors ; all of whom, however, with one 
exception, afterwards recalled their approbation. 



A2sD OTHER WKITERS OF SCEIPTXRE. 



545 



his birth-place, Pequigny, in France, was born in 1633, and died 
at Paris in 1709. He was a Capuchin. Very few particulars of 
his life have been recorded by the historian. That he was an 
humble and pious religious may be well inferred from the cha- 
racter of the works that he has written. These are excellent 
commentaries on the scripture in Latin. One is a commentary 
on the gospels ; the other is on the epistles of St. Paul. The 
commentary on the epistles is well known by the name Triplex 
Expositio, a name which is very properly given to it, as it is in 
truth a threefold explanation of the text of the apostle. First, 
there is a prefatory analysis prefixed to each chapter, declaring 
the order and connexion of its contents ; secondly, to this is sub- 
joined a paraphrase by which the sense of the chapter is briefly 
and clearly explained ; thirdly, then follows the commentary, 
containing literal notes on the text, and at the same time point- 
ing out the various readings, and, in the more difficult passages, 
giving a very full explanation of that sense which appears to be 
more conformable to the text. This commentary is interspersed 
with various dogmatical, pious, moral, and ascetic observations. 
The moral reflections are eminently practical : these are espe- 
cially to be found at the conclusion of the commentary on each 
chapter, in what the author calls the coroUarium pietatis. In 
all this the author has avoided the extremes of diffuseness and 
brevity. The work was honoured by the eulogy of Pope Cle- 
ment XI. It is admirably adapted for the use of the pastor of 
souls; and is justly the most popular Latin commentary on St. 
Paul's epistles which we now have. It has been translated into 
French. 

Dom Augustin Calmet was born in Lorraine, in 1672. He 
took the religious habit among the Benedictines of St. Yannes 
in 1688. From an early age he evinced a great love of study. 
He was particularly solicitous to acquire a knowledge of the 
oriental languages. He was very soon employed by his superiors 
to teach philosophy and theology to the younger members of the 
community. In 1704 he was sent to the abbey of Munster in 
quality of sub-prior. There he formed an academy of eight or 
ten of the religious, who devoted themselves entirely to the study 
of the sacred writings ; and he began himself to prepare his com- 
mentary on the bible. To reward him for his biblical labours he 
was made abbot of St. Leopold of Nancy in 1718 ; and after- 
wards of Senones in 1728. In this last mentioned abbey he 
died in 1757. Benedict XIII had wished to promote him to the 
dignity of a bishop in partibus, but the humble religious declined 
the honour. He was conspicuous throughout his long* life for 
his virtue and piety ; and his profound and extensive learijiag s 



546 



THE PEmCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



proclaimed by the numerous works which proceeded from his 
pen. His well known dictionary of the bible as well as his dis- 
sertations upon various biblical subjects, justly entitle him to be 
called the father of biblical archeology. From these works have 
all the more modern writers on such matters principally enriched 
their pages. As a commentator he has written on the scripture. 
His commentary is in French, entitled Commentaire litteral sur 
tons les livres de V Ancien et du Nouveau Testament. It was 
brought out in twenty-three volumes, quarto, 1707-1715 : it was 
reprinted in twenty-six volumes, quarto ; and in nine volumes, 
folio. Dorninick Mansi translated the work into Latin, in which 
translation it has been often printed in Italy and Germany. 
The author restricts himself to the investigation of the literal 
sense ; and he has everywhere displayed such learning in the exe- 
cution of bis work that it has received the approbation of almost 
everyone, including even Protestant critics. Dr. Adam Clarke, 
quoted by Home, says, " This is, without exception, the best 
comment on the sacred writings ever published, either by Catho- 
lics or Protestants/' It does not belong to our purpose here to dis- 
cuss the merits of this author as compared with our other Ca- 
tholic commentators. One thing, however, is manifest, viz., that 
as a philologist, historian, and archaeologist, no man ever brought 
higher qualifications to the task of interpreting the sacred volume. 
Calmet's commentary was abridged by a priest of Yence, who 
published it in fourteen volumes, quarto, 1748-1750. This is 
called, from the abbreviator, Bible de V Abbe de Vence. This 
epitome was republished soon after, with additions, at Avignon, 
in seventeen volumes, quarto ; this is called, from the place of 
its publication, Bible d' Avignon. 

A^thoxy Maktjxi, whose translation of the bible into Italian 
has been mentioned in a preceding part of this work, was born 
at Prato, in Tuscany, in 1720. His useful labours in translating 
and commenting on the sacred volume, recommended him to the 
notice of Pius VI, who honoured him with a laudatory brief, 
dated the 17th of March, 1778. Pius VI, not content with this 
mark of his esteem, named Martini to the bishopric of Eobbio in 
the Genoese territory. He passed through Florence on his way 
to Rome to be consecrated. The Grand Duke Leopold, being 
made aware of his merit, claimed him as his subject, and named 
him Archbishop of Florence in 1781. He discharged the duties 
of his office with fidelity and zeal ; and proved his attachment to 
sound doctrine, and, to the Pope, by effectually resisting the 
changes which the advocates of the principles of Bicei, Bis- 
hop of Pistoia, wished to introduce into his" jurisdiction. This 
learned archbishop died in 1809. Besides the brief notes in 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. O 17 

Italian with which he accompanied his translation of the bible 
he left also other works, all of which bear testimony to his great 
learning and piety. 

John Nepomtjcene Alber, a regular clerk of the Pious Schools, 
a doctor of divinity, and professor of sacred scripture and the 
oriental languages in the archiepiscopal academy of Pesth in 
Hungary, is well known by his learned works on biblical her- 
meneutics. He published, moreover, in the early part of this 
century, 1801-1804, in sixteen volumes, octavo, an interpretation 
of the entire scripture of the Old and New Testament. This work, 
which was published at Pesth, is in Latin, like the works of the 
same author on hermeneutics. At the beginning of each book is 
placed a short preface treating on its author, and containing a synop- 
sis of the contents of the book ; then follows the text of the book 
according to the Latin Yulgate, which text is accompanied with 
a commentary, wherein the author points out the sense of each 
passage in the text, confirms this sense by arguments, has 
recourse to the origiual text as often as the occasion appears to 
call for it, and discusses the controversies which have arisen, as 
well respecting the state of the text as respecting its meaning*. 
The author exhibits an extensive acquaintance with the writings 
of the fathers, as also with the works of the modern commentators ; 
and he is particularly careful to let no opportunity escape of im- 
pugning and refuting the notions of the anti-supernaturalist 
writers of Germany, as well as of the enemies of divine revelation 
generally. 

We cannot conclude this list of Catholic commentators, which 
after all, is far from being complete, without noticing a country- 
man of our own who has conferred great honour on his native 
land in another hemisphere. This is Francis Patrick Kenrice:, 
Archbishop of Baltimore, whose truly able and learned work on 
Dogmatic Theology entitled him to be ranked with the very best 
of our modern theologians. His Moral Theology is also a most 
valuable work ; and inferior to neither of these is his Primacy of 
the Apostolic See vi?idicated. This learned prelate has published 
the New Testament in what may be called a new translation into 
English from the Latin Yulgate, and this translation he has 
accompanied with critical and explanatory notes. The whole 
work makes two large volumes, octavo, New York, 1849-1851. 
The notes are brief; for, as the author informs us in his general 
preface to the Gospels, in order not to swell the volume too much 
he has left it to the piety of the reader to make such moral 
reflections as the facts or maxims may naturally suggest. The 
same rule has been followed in the second volume. These brief 
notes are learned and judicious. The critical notes display an 



548 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



intimate acquaintance with the several critical editions of the 
text as well as an extensive knowledge of its versions, particu- 
larly those into English, which preceded his own. 
Section II. — Of the Protestant Commentators : — 
"We nmst be brief in this part ; for our object in this chapter 
is to treat principally of the Catholic commentators. We do not 
intend by any means to mention all the Protestant commentators 
on scripture, but only those whose names are most likely to occur 
in modern Catholic commentaries, where they are introduced 
sometimes, either for the purpose of refuting them, or of using 
their admissions as an argumentum ad hominem, in defence of 
some Catholic truth. Of all the Protestant commentators, 
perhaps the best qualified for the task which they undertook 
were Dkttsitjs, Lewis be Dieu, and Grotius. John Drtjsihs 
was a native of the Low Countries, where he was born in the 
middle of the sixteenth century. His name was properly Driesches, 
which was Latinized into Drusius. He was appointed to teach 
the oriental languages at Oxford ; afterwards he held a similar 
appointment at Leyden ; and finally was Professor of Hebrew at 
Franeker, in Holland, where he died. He wrote several works 
besides his notes on the scripture. This work is in Latin. It was 
published separately, both in folio and quarto, and was afterwards 
reprinted in the collection which is known by the name Critici 
Sacri, and which was published in London in 1660. Lewis de 
Dieij was principal of one of the colleges of Leyden, and a pro- 
fessor of the university. He was born towards the close of the 
sixteenth century. He was distinguished above the other 
Protestant writers of his time by his superior knowledge of the 
oriental languages. He wrote notes on almost the entire of the 
scripture. These are all in Latin. The first book on the scrip- 
ture which he published was the Apocalypse of St. John in the 
Syriac, with a Latin version, the Greek text, and notes: Leyden, 
1627, in quarto. His commentary or observations on the four 
gospels appeared in 1631, quarto. The notes on the Acts of the 
Apostles were published in 1634, quarto. The notes on the 
epistles of St. Paul, and on the books of the Old Testament, in 
two volumes, quarto, were published after his death. Hugh 
Grotitjs was born at Delft, in Holland, in 1583. Having made 
his early studies with great success, he applied himself specially 
to the study of the law, and soon attained a high rank as an 
advocate. His work, Be Jure Belli et Pads, acquired great 
celebrity in its time, and is still well known. The author, 
however, is inaccurate in several points appertaining to the 
natural law, and hence the work was condemned at Eome. He 
wrote, in Latin, Annotations on the Old and New Testament, which 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 549 

were published separately at Paris ; as also in the collection of 
his Opera Theologica^ Basil, 1732 ; and also in the Critici Sacri. 
Grotius was a man of extensive erudition. But several Protest- 
ants, even, complained of the decided Arianism which appears 
in his commentary. On the subject of grace, also, he was 
accused of Pelagianism ; and he was blamed for having gone to 
an extreme in mixing up profane erudition with the explanation 
of the scripture. The collection of commentators on the scripture, 
in Latin, called Synopsis Criticorum, or Poli Synopsis, from 
having been made by Matthew Poole, an Englishman, was 
received very favourably by Protestants, and is still held in high 
estimation among them. It is an abridgment of the Critici Sacri. 
This latter work, {the Critici Sacri) was published in London in 
1660, nine volumes, folio ; and afterwards at Amsterdam, in 
1698, in twelve volumes. Poole's Synopsis is in five volumes, 
folio. It was first published at London, in 1669-1674. After- 
wards it was published at Utrecht in 1684, five volumes, folio. 
Although the Utrecht edition contains some additional matter, 
it is not preferred to that of London, which is very accurately 
printed. The compiler sometimes inserts observations of his 
own, which are enclosed within brackets ; but they are few, and 
very brief. As might be expected, the Protestant commentators 
occupy much the larger part of the work ; at the same time, the 
Catholic interpreters are by no means excluded. The compiler 
has everywhere shown a high appreciation of the labours of 
Menochius. The commentaries of JonN Le Clerc, in Latin, 
Clericus, on the entire scripture, were received with great favour 
by the Protestants of the Continent. His commentary on the 
Old Testament is appended to his Latin translation of that part 
of the scripture. It was published at Amsterdam in 1708, four 
volumes, folio. His commentary on the ~New Testament is con- 
tained in his observations on the paraphrase and notes of Ham- 
mond, which he translated from the English. This part of his 
work was published at Erankfort, 1714, two volumes, folio. The 
entire commentary of Le Clerc is in Latin. His views on the 
interpretation of scripture are exceedingly lax. In fact, he so 
treats of the prophecies and miracles recorded in the sacred 
volume, that he may be well classed among the Rationalistic 
commentators. As an exegetical work on the entire scripture, 
the scholia of Rosenmtjller, father and son, appear to enjoy, at 
present, the greatest popularity among the Protestants of the 
Continent. The scholia on the Old Testament were written by 
the younger Rosenmuller. They occupy eighteen volumes, 
octavo, and have been repeatedly printed. The author, although 
not belonging to the lowest school of Rationalists, was, never- 



550 THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 

theless, no believer in the inspiration of the book which he 
undertook to interpret. He sometimes borrows long passages 
from our Catholic commentators, which he copies verbatim without 
even naming the authors. The scholia on the Xew Testament 
are by the father of the preceding writer. He is admitted to 
have been a learned philologist ; and he does not attempt any- 
thing beyond the explanation of words and .phrases. Although 
by no means a safe guide to the knowledge of the sense of the 
3Tew Testament, he is not so dangerous a writer as his son. His 
work fills five volumes, octavo, and has gone at least through six 
editions. Both this commentary, and the scholia on the Old 
Testament, are written in Latin. A work which has been 
received with vast applause by Protestants on the Continent, and 
even by several in these countries, is a Latin commentary on the 
historical books of the Xew Testament by Christian Theophilus 
Kuinoel. This work, which first appeared in the beginning of 
this century, has been extolled by numerous admirers as realizing 
the very perfection of what is called a philological commentary. 
It has gone through numerous editions. The best known in 
these countries is the London edition, 1828, three volumes, 
octavo. The Greek text is printed in this edition. The first 
volume contains the gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark ; the 
second volume has the other two gospels ; and the last volume 
contains the Acts of the Apostles. iSow, to give our own opinion 
of the merits of this commentator : whatever may be said of his 
attainments as a grammarian or a philologist, it is perfectly 
absurd to rank him, as Protestants do, among the distinguished 
interpreters of the scripture. He appears to have been incapable 
of taking an exalted view of any theological subject. Although 
not rejecting all the miracles recorded in the Isew Testament 
history, yet he so frequently has recourse to frigid conceptions 
and manifest evasions, in order to divest the text of what appears 
wonderful in its plain statement ; he so frequently quotes, with 
respect, commentators like Paulus, that one is often impelled to 
look upon him as a Rationalist in disguise. When, turning from 
such solid commentators on the gospel as Maldonatus, Cornelius 
Gandavensis, or Lucas Brugensis, one takes up such a book as 
Kuinoel, he can experience nothing but disgust. 

Among the English Protestant commentators the three fol- 
lowing appear to be the most distinguished. First, Matthew 
Hexrt. He was a Presbyterian minister, son of Philip Henry, 
one of the founders of Presbyterianism in England. He died in 
the early part of the last century. His commentary on the Old 
and New Testament was first published in five volumes, folio. It 
has been often reprinted ; and is now to be met with in folio, 



AND OTHER WRIT EES OX SCULPTURE. 551 

quarto, and octavo. This commentary has been always a great 
favourite with the Presbyterian party as well as with the 
evangelican Anglicans. The author aims chiefly at being prac- 
tical. He writes, of course, as the advocate of a sect ; and the 
most that can be said in favour of his work is, that it is, per- 
haps, the best imitation of a pious commentary on the scripture, 
that has appeared amongst Protestants. Second, Thomas 
Scott. He was an Aigicai minister : his death occurred 
about thirty years since. He began in 1788 to publish his work 
on the scripture, under the following title, "The Holy Bible, 
containing the Old and New Testament, with Original Notes, 
Practical Observations, and Copious Marginal References. " The 
best edition of the work is that of London, 1822, six volumes, 
quarto. This commentary was so well received by his co-religion- 
ists, that the author lived to bring out four large editions of it, 
and to prepare the greater part of the fifth for the press. In 
the United States of America as well as in England, it enjoys a 
high reputation among Protestant readers. The great aim of the 
author appears to have been, to divest the commentary, as much 
as possible, of the character and appearance of a compilation ; 
and to come before the public as an original thinker on the 
meaning of the inspired volume : but he has carried out this 
idea, as all his class of interpreters has done ; that is to say, he 
has generally permitted the prejudices of a sect to think for him. 
Third, Adam Clark. He was an Angelican Protestant and 
Doctor of Laws. He died not many years ago. He has written 
a commentary and critical notes on the Old and New Testaments, 
as they are found in the English authorized version. The whole 
work, including this English text, was brought out in eight vols, 
quarto, London, 1810-1826. The author lived to prepare 
another edition of the work, which appeared in 1833-1836, five 
vols, royal octavo, and also in quarto. It is impossible to refuse 
to this writer the praise of erudition, and an extensive acquain- 
tance with biblical criticism ; and it must excite a feeling of 
special regret to find such a man advocating those errors which 
Protestants have agreed to defend. Perhaps one of the ablest 
Protestant writers who have commented on the Scripture in 
English, is James Mackxight, a Scotch Presbyterian minisier, 
who died in 1800. He wrote a Harmony of the Gospsls. As a 
scriptural interpreter, he published a translation of the Apostoli- 
cal Epistles, with a commentary and notes. 

As we have already said, it is not our intention to treat of all 
the Protestant commentators. They are numerous ; for, since 
Protestantism is subdivided into several sects, each of which pro- 
fesses to rest its peculiar views on the meaning of the scripture, 



552 



TEE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



hence, each sect has produced its commentators. Martin 
Luther, the head of the so-called reformation, wrote commen- 
taries on several of the books of scripture, in which he perverts 
the meaning of the sacred volume, as he did also in his other 
works, through hostility to the church. The Lutherans — who 
claim the honour of being considered the special followers of the 
patriarch of Protestantism — have supplied many names to the 
list of scriptural interpreters. Again : John Calvin leads the 
ranks of Calvinistic commentators. What with commentaries, 
homilies, and lectures, he has written on much the greater part 
of the scriptures. His well known hostility to the Church of 
God appears also in his commentaries. It was, of course, as 
inexcusable as that of Luther ; nor was it less decided. Yet, 
sometimes, there is an apparent moderation in the commentaries 
of Calvin, such as is not to be found in those of Luther. This is 
attributed, with great probability, to the dread which Calvin had 
of giving occasion to further differences between the new sects, 
which were then almost as violently opposed to each other as 
they were to the ancient church. The most faithful of Calvin's 
disciples was Theodore Beza, who succeeded his master in the 
government of the Calvinistic church of Geneva, and died in that 
city in the beginning of the 17th century. He was the author 
of a translation of the JSTew Testament into Latin, with notes. 
We have had occasion to speak of his translation before. Suffice 
it here to say, that the most learned Protestants have pronounced 
him an unscrupulous translator : and, if he could bring himself 
to take such a liberty with the text, for the purpose of support- 
ing his theological views, it was not to be expected that he would 
display a greater spirit of fairness in his notes. We may men- 
tion here another follower of Calvin who was distinguished, per- 
haps, above any other for the zeal with which he defended all the 
doctrines of that heresiarch — especially those regarding free will 
and the distribution of grace — in all their extreme and revolting 
rigour ; this is Francis Gomar, who was a professor of theology 
in the university of Leyden, and from whom the rigid Calvinists 
in Holland got the name of Gomarists. He commented on select 
passages from the gospels of St. Matthew, St. Luke, and St. 
John. He commented also on several of St. Paul's epistles ; on 
a part of the Canonical epistles, and on some chapters of the 
Apocalypse. His commentaries are filled with, theological 
questions. The aim of the author, almost exclusively, as Richard 
Simon observes, was, to establish the rigorous doctrines of Calvin, 
which were then beginning to be distasteful to the most learned 
of the party. The adversaries of the Gomarists were called 
Arminians. They also had their commentators on the scripture. 



AND OTHEK WRITERS OX SCRIPTURE. 



553 



James Arminius, from whom this party derived their name, was 
also a professor of theology in Leyden, contemporarily with 
Gomar. Arminius defended free-will against Gomar and the 
strict followers of Calvin, and he rejected Calvin's absolute 
decrees respecting predestination and reprobation. This soften- 
ing down of the doctrines of their master, Calvin, brought upon 
Arminius and his followers the vengeance of the other party, 
which was much stronger in Holland. The Arminians were 
solemnly condemned in the Synod of Dort, and afterwards signally 
chastised by their powerful adversaries. Arminius himself 
wrote but little in the way of commentary on the scripture. But, 
because the battle-ground in the scripture between the Goma- 
rists and the Arminians was the epistle of St. Paul to the 
Romans, hence, we find among the writings of Arminius a dis- 
sertation on the sense of the seventh chapter of that epistle, and 
an analysis of the ninth chapter. Simon Episcopus was a dis- 
tinguished member of the Arminian party. He was professor of 
theology at Leyden, at the time of the Synod of Dort. That 
assembly cited him before it, deposed him from his office as a 
minister of the reformed worship, and ordered him to quit the 
Dutch territory. He has written commentaries on several parts 
of the New Testament, in which he strenuously combats Calvin's 
system of grace and predestination. It appears from his com- 
mentaries, as well as from his Theological institutions, that he 
was very tolerant of the errors of the Anti-Trinitarians. Indeed, 
it is doubtful whether he considered their doctrine to be at all 
erroneous ; since he unwarrantably asserted that the scripture 
was not clear upon the point ; and, as a consistent Protestant, 
he held that the scripture alone should decide the controversy. 
Another distinguished member of the Arminian party was 
Grottos, of whose labours, as a commentator, we have spoken 
already. 

The Socinians, and other modern Anti-Trinitarians, have had 
their commentators, of whom we may mention Servetus, Socinus, 
and CrelMus. The modern opponents of the doctrine of the 
Trinity may claim Michael Servetus as their chief. He was a 
native of Spain, and was born in the commencement of the six- 
teenth century. He became a doctor in medicine at Paris, and 
soon distinguished himself by his attachment to novel doctrines, 
and especially by his opposition to the dogma of the Trinity. 
Having been obliged to leave Prance, he went to Geneva, where, 
because it was a Protestant city, he counted upon that toleration 
for his opinions which the principles of Protestantism would 
appear to guarantee to him. But, in order to show him how far 
the practice of the Eeformers might differ from, their theory, 



554 THE PEIXCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 

when circumstance? permitted it, Calvin caused him to be burned 
alive in the year 1553. in the forty-fourth year of his age. Be- 
sides other works, he published an edition of Pagninus' version 
of the bible, with a preface arid scholia, under the name of Michael 
VHJanovanus. This bible was printed at Lyons in 1542. in folio. 
It was suppressed : and. in several places, all the copies of the 
writings of Servetus that could be found were committed to the 
flames. FArsirs Socixrs. was an Italian, a native of Sienna. 
About the middle of the sixteenth century, a period fertile in 
errors of all kinds, he distinguished himself by his opposition to 
the doctrine of the Trinity. He went farther than the Allans of old, 
and held, like the modern Unitarians, that Christ was a mere man, 
having had no existence previous to his birth. He taught various 
other errors, which were embraced by the sect that from him got 
the name of Socinians. In his works are found commentaries on 
several portions of the scripture, particularly of the Xew Testa- 
ment ; in all of which he mixes up his peculiar errors, which he 
attempts to sustain by perverting the meaning of the clearest 
texts. .Juhx CnziLirs was a native of Germany. He was born 
towards the close of the sixteenth century. Having embraced 
the Socinian errors, he was held in the highest esteem by the 
sect, who regarded him as the great champion of their doctrines ; 
to defend which he wrote several works, among the rest a com- 
mentary on a part of the ZSTew Testament. He continually, 
throughout this commentary, labours to pervert the meaning 
of every passage of scripture which his adversaries might be 
disposed to urge against his doctrines ; and this he does without 
the least regard to the plain and obvious sense of the words, or 
to the authority and constant tradition of the church. But we 
must draw these observations to a conclusion, since it is not our 
intention to mention all the commentators of all the sects into 
which Protestantism is divided. We all know how many might 
be named in Germany alone, where every grade of Protestant 
opinion, from the highest Calvinistic views down to the lowest 
Rationalism, has furnished its exegetical writers on the scripture. 
\Ve pass over all these, and many more, to come to another 
portion of our subject. But, first, a word or two of a very 
modern commentary, which has been repeatedly printed in these 
countries; we refer to Bloomfield'fi English Notes on the Greek 
Testament. \Ye mentioned this commentary in a preceding dis- 
sertation, when treating of the editions of the Greek Testament. 
It is, in a great measure, a compilation from previous Protestant 
commentators. The author sometimes quotes Estius on the 
Epistles ; if ever he quotes any other Catholic commentator, 
such as Menochius or Calmet. it is very seldom indeed. 2sow ; 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



555 



although the work appears to have been well received by Protestant 
readers, we have no doubt but it -would have been even more 
acceptable to them, had the author not confined himself so ex- 
clusively to Protestant sources of information. We do not mean 
to say, that the parading of Catholic names would have added to 
the attractions of his work ; but what we mean is, that the in- 
formation conveyed in his book would have been of a superior 
kind to what it is, had the author really consulted our Catholic 
commentators. 

Section III. — Of the Catholic writers on the introduction to 
the Study of Scripture : — 

Although our principal concern in this dissertation is with 
the commentators on scripture, we must not omit to refer, briefly, 
also to the principal writers on those subjects that are considered 
as introductory to the study of the sacred text. Many such 
Catholic writers nourished during this period. In the first place, 
several of those already mentioned as commentators, wrote also 
ori one or more of those introductory questions. To this class of 
works belongs the learned treatise, in Latin, by Mknochius, on 
the Hebrew Republic. The learned Prcdoquia of Bonerkrius are 
well known. In these the author has brought together a vast 
deal of information, respecting the canon, inspiration, original 
language, ancient versions, &c, of the scripture. Serarius wrote 
prolegomena on the scripture, contained in one volume, folio, 
Paris, 1704. They are much esteemed, as well as a learned 
treatise by the same author, on the three most famous sects of 
the Jews — the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenians. M.ariana 
was the author of a learned dissertation, entitled Pro Vulgata 
Zattna, which contains much useful information respecting that 
famous version. We have from Pere Lamy the well known 
introduction to the bible, entitled Apparatus Biblicus. It was 
written in French by Larny, and afterwards translated into Latin. 
We have from the same author a very learned work, in Latin, on 
the Tabernacle of the Covenant, and on the City and Temple of 
Jerusalem. In the controversies of Cardinal Bellarmine, the 
treatise Be Verbo Dei Scripto, may be viewed in the light of an 
introduction to the scripture. Dutln has written on the intro- 
duction to the bible, in a preliminary dissertation prefixed to his 
work on the ecclesiastical writers. This dissertation, like the 
work to which it is prefixed, is in French. In it the author 
treats of the canon, authority, and inspiration of the scripture, of 
the Samaritan Pentateuch, of the Eastern versions, of the Greek, 
Latin, and more modern versions : then there are special disquisi- 
tions on each of the books — as well of the Old as of the New 
Testament — respecting its author, the time at which it was com- 



556 THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 

posed, and various other circumstances tending to illustrate it. 
We must observe, that the author has often in this dissertation 
wandered so far from Catholic views, that he was compelled by 
the Archbishop of Paris to retract publicly several of his asser- 
tions. This dissertation was printed at Amsterdam in 1701, two 
tomes, quarto. We have already mentioned the Prolegomena of 
Dv Hamel, when speaking of his notes on the bible. Several of 
the dissertations, with which the Ecclesiastical History of Natalis 
Alexander is enriched, bear upon the subject of which we are 
treating. The title of his history is, Historia ecelesiastica Veteris 
Novique Testamenti. It was published at Paris, 1699, eight 
volumes in folio, and twenty four volumes in octavo. This work 
was reprinted at Lucca in 1754, with the notes of Eoncaglia, 
which rectify or elucidate several passages. The dictionary 
and dissertations of Calmet have been already mentioned. They 
were written in French, and have been translated into Latin by 
Mansi. The dissertations are not only to be found in their proper 
place in the commentary of Calmet, but have been moreover often 
printed separately, both in French and Latin. 

Besides these authors, all of whom have been mentioned 
before as commentators on the scripture, several other Catholic 
authors have, during this period, illustrated by their writings 
this introductory department of biblical studies; among whom 
the following are principally entitled to notice. Benedict Arias 
Montands : he was a native of Spain ; he applied himself at an 
early age to the study of languages, and appeared with great 
distinction at the Council of Trent, having gone there as theolo- 
gian to the Bishop of Segovia. He is well known as the editor 
of the Antwerp polyglot. He wrote several works, of which the 
most esteemed is a Latin treatise, in nine books, on the Jewish 
antiquities. It was published in the Antwerp polyglot : and was 
also printed separately in Leyden, in 1596, in quarto. It was 
also printed in the London edition of the Critici Sacri. — Sixths 
of Sienna, Sixtus Seneyisis, was a convert from Judaism to the 
Christian religion. He entered the Franciscan order. Having 
been convicted of teaching heresy, he pertinaciously refused to 
retract, and was about to suffer the punishment of his crime, 
when Pius Y, who was then a cardinal, and inquisitor of the 
faith, overcame his obstinacy, and had him transferred from the 
order of St. Francis to that of St. Dominick. Here Sixtus applied 
himself assiduously to the study of the sacred scripture. He 
composed several works, of which the most famous is his Biblio- 
theca Sancta. The work is in Latin. It is a very full introduc- 
tion to the study of scripture, and has been very often printed. 
It is divided into eight books. In it he treats of the subject of 



AOT OTHEE WRITERS OF SCRIPTURE. 557 

each book of scripture, and of its author ; he treats of the writers, 
books, and writings mentioned in the bible, or that relate to it ; 
he treats of the art of explaining the holy scriptures : gives us an 
alphabetical dictionary of all the authors who have written upon 
the scriptures, and of their works : and he mentions all the ancient 
and modern heretics that have rejected or opposed the books of 
holy scriptures ; he refutes their errors, and answers the objec- 
tions which they raised against those books. The work contains 
several other particulars : it is, on the whole, learned and curious, 
but it is not without faults. The best edition of it is that of 
Naples, 1742, two volumes, in folio .Martix Becax, Becanus, 
was a Jesuit. He was a native of Brabant, and died in 1624. 
He is well known as an eminent theological writer. His works 
are in Latin. The most popular, as well as the most valuable of 
them, is his Analogia Veteris et Novi Testamenti. It was published 
in one volume, octavo, and has been often republished in various 
forms. In it the author admirably explains the relations 
between the gospel and the ancient law, and shows how 
the revelations contained in both testaments harmonize in 
one- body of doctrine. John Morin, Morinus, was born at 
Plois, in France, in 1591. His parents were Calvinists. Having 
completed at Leyden an extensive course of studies, embracing 
theology and the oriental languages, he made a journey to Paris, 
where he became acquainted with Cardinal du Perron. That 
learned prelate soon prevailed upon him to abjure Calvinism. 
Morinus now entered the congregation of the Oratory, which had 
been just then founded. Here he prosecuted his studies with 
great ardour, and acquired that high reputation as an ecclesias- 
tical antiquarian and a biblical scholar with which his name is 
ever since associated. He was perfectly versed in the oriental 
languages. He conferred a vast benefit on scriptural studies by 
publishing the Samaritan pentateuch in the Paris polyglot. His 
works, which bear upon the introduction to the scripture, are 
written in Latin ; they are principally the two following : 
Exercitationes Biblicce, Paris, 1633, quarto, and 1660, folio; 
Exercitationes ecclesiasticce in utrumque Samaritanorum Penta- 
teuchum, Paris, 1631, quarto. In these two works, as well as in 
the preface to his edition of the Septuagint, Morinus combats 
vigorously the views of Protestants regarding the perfection of 
the present Hebrew text of the bible. Rjchakd Sinox was born 
at Dieppe, in France, in 1638. He embraced the ecclesiastical 
state, and entered the French Oratory. In the course of time 
he left that congregation, and took charge of a parish. After a 
few years he gave up his parish, and retired to Dieppe, where he 
died at an advanced age. His life was filled with literary 



558 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



labours of one "kind or another ; studying the ancient languages, 
composing books, and replying to the attacks of numerous 
adversaries. He was the author of a French translation of the 
New Testament, with literal and critical remarks. This work 
was condemned by Bossuet and the Archbishop of Paris. His 
works on the introduction to the study of scripture are well 
known : they are principally the following : The critical history 
of the text, the versions, and the commentators of the Old Testa- 
ment; The critical history of the text of the New Testament; The 
critical history of the versions of 'the New Testament; The critical 
in story of the principal commentators of the Neiv Testament; New 
observations on the text and versions of the New Testament. These 
works, which are all written in French, make five volumes, 
quarto. The edition of the first four volumes, which is most 
sought after, was brought out at Rotterdam, under Protestant 
editorship, during the lifetime of the author. The Paris edition 
or the fifth volume, 1695, is esteemed. These critical histories 
by Father Simon display a great amount of erudition ; but, on 
account of the rashness of his criticism in many places, they were 
put on the Eoman index of prohibited books. In fact, there 
are several assertions in the works of Simon quite opposed to 
Catholic views. Hence, this author has enjoyed such favour 
among Protestants. At the same time, he often refutes their 
opinions and assertions with a peculiar force, and in a way which 
provoked attacks from several of them. Hoebigaxt, also a 
priest of the French Oratory, and contemporary with Richard 
Simon, is well known by his edition and Latin version of the 
Hebrew bible. He wrote an introduction to the scripture in 
Latin, entitled Prolegomena in Scripturam Sacram, Paris, 1747, 
quarto. John ^Iaetiaxay, a learned Benedictine, was a native 
of France, and was born about the middle of the seventeenth 
century. He was specially devoted to the study of scripture. 
This circumstance may explain his partiality for St. Jerome, of 
whose works he has given the best edition which we have. He 
was the author of an historical treatise on the canon of the booh of 
the sacred scripture, from their first publication down to the Council 
of Trent. The work is in French, and was published in Paris 
in 1703, duodecimo. Ja^es Le Loxg was a native of Paris, 
where he was born in 1665. He gave his name to the congre- 
gation of the Oratory in that city, in 1686, and after some time 
was appointed librarian of the Paris house of St. Honore. That 
library was augmented by more than one-third, under his care. 
He terminated a most laborious life in 1721, at the age of fifty- 
six years. His famous work, entitled Bibliotheca Sacra, is of 
the greatest utility to the biblical studt nt. It is written in 



AXD OTHER WRIT EES OX SCRIPTURE. 



559 



Latin. The first edition of it appeared at Paris in 1709, two 
volumes, octavo. Another edition of it was printed at Leipsic in 
the same year, and in the same form, with some additions by the 
editor, C. P. Eoerner, who appears to have been a Lutheran. A 
better edition than either of these was published at Paris in 
1723, after the author's death, two volumes, folio. The care of 
the publication was undertaken by Desmolets, the successor of 
Le Long as librarian of St. Honore. This work is divided into 
two parts : in the first there is given a catalogue of the manu- 
scripts, and of the original texts of the bible, with their editions 
and versions ; the second part contains a notice of the authors 
who have written on the sacred scripture, and of their works. 
Of the additions made by Masch to the work of Le Long we shall 
speak afterwards. Le Long was also the author of a work in 
French, entitled an Historical discourse on the principal editions 
of the Polyglot bibles, Paris, 1713, octavo. Gabriel Pabricy was 
a native of Prance. He took the Dominican habit in Aix of 
Provence. Having been appointed provincial of his Order, he 
had occasion to go to Home on business connected with that office. 
He there received an appointment in connexion with the famous 
Casanata library of the Dominican convent of the Minerva. This 
office was quite to his taste, as it afforded him the means of grati- 
fying his love of study. He died in Rome, in 1800, after having 
given to the world the result of his laborious researches in several 
learned works. His great work, bearing on the subject of which 
we are treating, and written in Prench, is entitled Bes titres 
primitifs de la revelation, or, according to his own explanation of 
this title, critical considerations on the purity and the integrity of 
the original text of the sacred bool's of the Old Testament. This work 
was published at Eome in 1772, two volumes, octavo. It exhi- 
bits great learning and research. The author examines fully the 
character of that portion of the original text of the Old Testa- 
ment which is still preserved ; and he defends, with great 
ingenuity and ability, the reading of the text according to the 
Masoretic system as, in general, far superior to any other that 
could be proposed. Joseph Julius Moxsperger was professor 
of biblical literature in the university of Vienna. He is the 
author of an ample and erudite treatise, in Latin, on Sacred 
Plermeneutics. It was published in the years 1776-77, at Vienna, 
in two parts, octavo. A second edition appeared in 1784. "We 
may mention here the work of the learned Jesuit Hermann 
Goldhagen, written in Latin, and entitled an Introduction to the 
Sacred Scripture. It was published at Mayence in 1765, octavo. 
The author lays down the principles of Sacred Hermeneutics, 
and combats the objections of the Prench infidels against the 



560 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTS TOES, 



scripture. Gee gory Mater was a German, and dean of the 
cathedral of Lintz, in Austria. He was a distinguished biblical 
scholar, and published various works on the scripture in the end 
of the last century and the beginning of the present. The 
most of these works are in German. One of them, how- 
ever, and a very useful work, is in Latin, entitled Institutio 
interpretis sacri. It was published in 1789, at Yienna, octavo. 
Besides explaining the doctrine of Hermeneutics, it contains a 
general introduction to the sacred books. Sebastian Seemiller 
was another learned German priest and professor at Ingolstadt. 
He published a Latin treatise on hermeneutics in 1799, Augsburg, 
octavo. The author displays in this work a profound acquaint- 
ance with the language and contents of the scripture. — Johjs" 
Jah^ was a canon of the metropolitan church of St. Stephen in 
Yienna ; and he successively occupied, in the university of that 
city, the chairs of biblical archaeology, dogmatic theology, and 
oriental languages. He was extensively acquainted with the 
languages and archaeology of the bible, as his works prove ; and 
his name is one of the best known in connexion with modern 
biblical literature. If his humility and good sense had been equal 
to his other qualifications for prosecuting the study of scripture, 
he would have been perfect in that department ; but his misfor- 
tune was, to have formed too high an opinion of the learning of the 
recent Protestant commentators of Germany — men whose teme- 
rity in their judgments on the scripture and its interpretation 
knows no limits. In consequence of the estimate which he 
formed of those men he was not sufficiently on his guard against 
their pernicious views ; and, hence, he advanced some opinions 
which led to his removal from the office of professor, in 1806. 
He spent the remainder of his days in retirement and in the com- 
position of various works; and died at Yienna in 1817. He 
wrote, in the German language, an Introduction to the books of 
the Old Testament. He afterwards published a Latin abridgment 
of this work, Yienna, 1804, octavo. Professor Ackermann gave 
an expurgated edition of this work in 1825, Yienna, octavo. 
Jahn also wrote a Manual of Sacred Hermeneutics, Yienna, 1812, 
octavo ; and an appendix to it, Yienna, 1813-15, octavo. These 
two works are in Latin. He wrote, in the German language, a 
History of the Hebrew Commonwealth, from the earliest times to 
the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Of all his works 
that which has acquired the most fame is his Archeology of the 
Bible. This work was written by him in German, and published 
in five large octavo volumes. He afterwards made an abridg- 
ment of it in Latin, of which he published a second edition with 
corrections in 1814, Yienna, octavo. The works of Jahn have, 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



561 



with all recent writers on biblical antiquities, served the same 
purpose to a great extent as the works of Calmet did with the 
less modern writers ; that is to say, they have been the great 
storehouse from which they have drawn the learning that appears 
in their works. That such a treasure might be properly fitted 
to serve the cause of religion, the learned professor, Ackermann, 
as he had done before for Jahn's introduction to the Old Testa- 
ment, so he did with respect to this work ; that is, he gave an 
expurgated edition of the Latin abridgment. Ackermann's 
edition of the Archeology was published at Yienna in 1826. 
The Ilorce Biblicce y by Charles Butler, is too well known in 
this country to require a lengthened description here. It is, as 
the author himself explains on the title, "a connected series of 
miscellaneous notes on the original text, early versions, and 
printed editions of the Old and New Testament. " It was pub- 
lished in Oxford and London in 1799, octavo. It has been since 
repeatedly printed in royal octavo, with appendixes and an 
additional volume treating on the books accounted sacred by the 
Mahometans, Hindoos, Parsees, Chinese, and Scandinavians. 
The work, although not faultless, contains a great deal of useful 
matter on the subjects mentioned in the title. John Leonard 
Hug, professor of theology in the university of Eriburg in Bris- 
gau, wrote, in the German language, an Introduction to the 
writings of the New Testament ; which work has received great 
praise for its learning, even from Protestants. It has been trans- 
lated by them into English. The original work was published 
at Tubingen in 1808, in two volumes. The following is the 
judgment which Home passes on the work (Introduc, vol. If 
part if p. 149, seventh edition) : " Professor Hug (who is in 
communion with the Church of Rome) may be considered as the 
principal and most learned writer of that class which has opposed 
itself to the scepticism and fanciful theories of some modern 
German divines. His introduction has long been held in the 
highest estimation on the Continent for the variety and impor- 
tance of his critical researches on the New Testament. " An 
introduction to the sacred scripture was published at Liege in 
1818, by Professor J. Hermann Jansens, which deserves to be 
noticed. It is written in Latin, bearing the title of tiacred Her- 
meneutics, or, An Introduction to all and each of the sacred books of 
the Old and New Testament. It discusses almost all the questions 
that are considered introductory to the study of the sacred text. 
It is particularly valuable on account of the chapter on the 
authenticity of the sacred books ; in which chapter the author 
examines in detail and refutes the objections of deists, and of 
the modern German neologian critics, Eck and Paulus. A French 

2 o 



562 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



translation of the work, by J. J. Pacaud, with some additions 
and corrections, was published at Paris in 1828, two volumes, 
octavo. Altmann" Arigler was a Benedictine and professor of 
the New Testament-biblical literature, in Yienna. He published, 
in Latin, a treatise on Biblical Hernieneutics, Vienna, 1813, 
octavo. Without the ability of Jahn he imitated that professor 
in overrating the Protestant learning of his time, and hence he 
has given expression to sentiments in this book which drew upon 
him and it the disapprobation of the Church. John Nepomucene 
Alber, already mentioned as a commentator on the scrip- 
ture, is also the author of two comprehensive treatises on sacred 
hermeneutics ; one, on the interpretation of the Old, and another 
on the interpretation of the New Testament. They are written 
in Latin, and each work is in three volumes, octavo. The work 
on the Old Testament was printed at Pesth in Hungary in 1807 : 
the other work was printed at the same place in 1818. Of the 
treatise on the Old Testament two editions have since appeared, 
also at Pesth; one in 1816, and the other in 1827. The author, 
besides explaining the principles of interpretation, has given in 
these works a summary of biblical archaeology, a general and 
special introduction to the books of scripture, and an exposition 
of various difficult passages of the Old and jSew Testament. These 
treatises bear high testimony to the learning and diligence of 
the author. Even Home does him the justice to say, that, 
b ' throughout both these works he evinces himself to be an able 
and vehement adversary of the modern school of German neolo- 
gists." Joseph Francis Duclot was a learned and virtuous 
priest of Savoy. He died in 1821, at an advanced age, having 
earned by his writings the reputation of being one of the ablest 
defenders, in these latter times, of the Christian religion against 
the attacks of the infidels. His defence of the bible is written 
in Prench, with the following title : " La Salute Bible vengtfedes 
attaques de V incredulite, et justijiee de toute super cherie, contradic- 
tion avec la raison, avec tons les monuments historiques des sciences 
et des arts, avec la phisique, la geologic, la clironologie" Sfc. It 
was printed at Lyons, 1816 and the following years, six volumes, 
octavo. A second edition of it was printed at the same place in 
1821. This work has been translated into Italian, and has gone 
through several editions in that language. A work of the same 
kind as that just mentioned was written by the learned Jesuit, 
Laurence Prancis Xavier Yeith. It is in Latin, bearing the 
title, Script ura Sacra contra incredulos propugnata. Yeith was 
born at Augsburg in 1725. He died in 1796. He was pro- 
foundly learned in theological matters, and thoroughly acquainted 
with the works both of the ancients and moderns who had 



AXD OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTURE. 



563 



written in defence of the Christian religion. In this work on 
the scripture he examines and resolves all the objections which 
the modern infidels have made or reproduced against the sacred 
books. An edition of this work was printed at Mechlin in 1824, 
five volumes, duodecimo. It has been also printed by Abbe 
Migne in the fourth volume of the Scriptures Sacrce cursus comple- 
tus. Casper Uxterkircher was professor of the New Testament- 
biblical literature in the seminary of Trent. He published, in 
Latin, a treatise on hermeneutics, which was received with con- 
siderable applause by Catholics : and even Protestants acknow- 
ledged it to be a work of merit. At the same time, he tells us 
in his preface that he feared lest the Catholic reader might be 
offended by the novelty of some of his views ; all of which, 
however, he humbly submits to the judgment of the Church. 
He himself informs us that he took as the basis of his work the 
hermeneutics of Arigler already mentioned. But, whilst he 
availed himself of the labours of that writer he was anxious to 
guard against his defects, and, therefore, he has changed some 
things in Arigler' s work, omitted others, and added several 
things, whilst he has presented the whole subject in a clearer 
light. The first edition of Unterkircher's book was published in 
1831, Inspruck, octavo. It has gone through several editions 
since. 

Having arrived now at the period of living authors, it be- 
comes our first duty to mention the learned Cardinal Wiseman, 
who, in addition to his other illustrious merits, has deserved well 
of scriptural studies, as his most learned writings abundantly 
testify. His Horce Syriacce, which is written in Latin, one 
volume, octavo, Rome, 1828, is an indispensable book for such 
as would investigate the Syriac versions of the scripture. Even 
Horne styles it "a profoundly learned volume :" nor is Dr. 
Davidson, in the appendix to his Biblical Criticism, less com- 
plimentary in his notice of it. And, in the English works, the 
illustrious cardinal has treated most learnedly of several biblical 
subjects, investing them with all the charms of a most attractive 
style. In exemplification of what is here said, we may refer to 
his Lectures on the connexion between Science and Revealed Religion, 
Nor must we omit to mention the Lectures on the Heal Presexce 
in the Blessed Eucharist ; for these supply one of the very best 
examples that has been ever placed before the theological student 
of the application of the hermeneutical criteria to the discovery 
and development of the sense of scripture. We shall not delay 
upon several smaller essays by the same illustrious author, all 
bearing upon the subjects of which we are treating, and all dis- 
playing that learning and ability which characterize everything 



.564 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



that proceeds from his pen. J. B. Glaire is a name well known 
in connexion with biblical literature. The learned writer is dean 
of, and professor of sacred scripture to, the theological faculty of 
Paris. His works prove him to be well acquainted with the 
Oriental languages. He has published in the French language 
two very useful works on scriptural subjects. The first is a 
general and special introduction to the books of scripture, of 
which the first edition was printed in 1839, Paris, six volumes, 
duodecimo. The second work is entitled, Les Livres Saints 
Venges : it is an able defence of the historical and divine truth 
of the Old and New Testament against the principal attacks of 
modern infidels, especially the mythological and rationalistic 
critics. It was printed at Paris in 1845, two volumes, octavo. 
We have frequently, during the course of this work, profited by 
the learned labours of this writer, as we now gratefully acknow- 
ledge. A very useful introduction to the scripture, in the 
Latin language, was published at Rome, in three volumes, 
octavo, 1828-29-30. The name of the author is Thomas Mary 
Moralta. The work evinces much learning and research. We 
must not conclude without mentioning again, the learned work 
of Father Patrizt, entitled D$ interpretations Scripturarum 
Sacrarum, Libriduo, Rome, 1844, two volumes octavo. Finally, 
the Abbe Migne deserves to be commemorated, even among 
those who have deserved best of the scriptural studies, on account 
of the great service he has rendered to these studies, principally 
by his vast and well-known compilation, Scripturos Sacra 
cursus computus. 

Section IY : Of the Protestant writers on the introduction to 
the study of scripture. 

As our limits will not permit us to mention all the Protes- 
tant works on the introduction to the scripture, we must con- 
tent ourselves with noticing some of the most remarkable, and 
best known in these countries. 

We commence with the work of a Lutheran theologian, 
which has received the highest encomiums from Protestant 
writers. Solomon Glasstus, or Glass, was a Lutheran doctor, 
and Professor of theology at Jena, and superintendent general of 
the churches and schools of Saxe Gotha. He died at Gotha, in 
1656. His work is a Latin treatise on the interpretation of 
scripture, bearing the title of Philologia Sacra. It has been 
very often printed. The best edition is that of Leipzig, 1725, 
quarto. It is divided into five books, in which the author treats 
of the style and sense of the scripture, and of the grammar and 
rhetoric of the bible. The rules of interpretation are adapted to 
the Lutheran theology. John David Michaelis, as an Oriental 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTURE. 



565 



scholar and a man of great erudition, ranks high among the 
Protestant theologians of Germany. He was professor of philo- 
sophy in the university of Gottingen, where he died in 1791, at 
an advanced age. He published many works ; some of them in 
Latin, and others in the German language. The best known in 
these countries are the Introduction to the New Testament, and the 
commentaries on the laics of Moses. These works are written in 
German ; but have been translated into English : the first by Dr. 
Herbert Marsh, six volumes, octavo, Cambridge, 1802. A fourth 
edition of this work was published at London, 1823. The com- 
mentaries on the laws of Moses were translated by Dr. Alexander 
Smith, London, 1814, four volumes, octavo. Although Michaelis 
is considered by the Rationalists as far too credulous for their 
standard of judgment, yet his works are marked by a licentious 
criticism, and evince such a sceptical spirit as must shock the 
truly Christian reader. Adrian Reland was a native of Holland, 
where he was born towards the end of the seventeenth century. 
He became, even at an early age, a distinguished Oriental scholar. 
He died at Utrecht, where he had been professor of Oriental 
languages and ecclesiastical antiquities. He was the author of 
several works. The one which is best known is a very learned 
description of Palestine, written in Latin, and entitled, Palcestina 
ex monumentis veteribus tllustrata, Utrecht, 1714, two volumes, 
quarto. Brian Walton was a Protestant bishop of Chester, 
in England. He died in 1661. He was the principal editor of 
the London Polyglot bible which, from him, is called Walton h 
Polyglot. The work of which we intend to speak here, is what 
is called Waltoni prolegomena. It was first printed as a preface 
to the Polyglot bible, and consists of a number of dissertations, in 
Latin, on the several bibles contained in that publication. 
Catholic writers have been ever ready to admit that this work 
displays much critical judgment, learning, and moderation ; 
yet they are not disposed to subscribe to the justice of all the 
author's decisions as regards the relative merits of those 
several translations of the scripture which he discusses. 
Walton's prolegomena was published separately at Zurich, in 
1673. An edition of it was published at Leipzig, 1777, with a 
long preface by John Augustus Dathe, who censures Walton 
occasionally for not having been sufficiently Protestant in his 
view. The edition by Dathe is in one volume, octavo. A new 
edition of the work, in two volumes, octavo, was printed at the 
Cambridge University press, in 1828 : it contains the notes of 
Dathe, and of several others, as well as of the editor, Francis 
Wrangham. Humphrey Hodt was Regius Professor of Greek 
in the university of Oxford. He died 1706. Besides other 



566 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



works he wrote a Latin treatise on " the original texts of the 
bible, the Greek versions, and the Latin Vulgate." This work 
was published at Oxford in 1705, folio. It displays a great 
amount of learning and research, and is the great authority with 
all those who impugn the authenticity of Aristeas' book on the 
Septuagint. At the same time it is manifest, from observations 
which occasionally present themselves in his work, as well as 
from his views respecting the Latin Yulgate, that Hody was 
considerably imbued with Protestant prejudices. On the other 
hand, he gave offence to several of his own party by refusing to 
admit the great antiquity of the Hebrew vowel points. John 
Gottlob Carpzov was born at Dresden in 1679. He died in 
1767. He composed several works, in Latin, on the introduction 
to the sacred scripture. The most famous of these is his Criiica 
sacra Veteris Testamenti, Leipzig, 1738, quarto. Carpzov, although 
decidedly Anti- Catholic in his views, is far removed from those 
lax notions respecting the scripture for which the later Protes- 
tant critics of Germany are so notorious. Robert Lowth was 
Protestant bishop of London, where he died in 1757. He had 
been previously professor of poetry in the university of Oxford. 
He was the author of a work on the Hebrew poetry, which has 
acquired great fame : it has for title De sacra poesi Sebrceorum 
prcelectiones academic®. It has been repeatedly printed, both in 
the original Latin, and in various translations. Home considers 
that the best edition of the original work is that published at 
Oxford, in 1821, octavo. Humphrey Prideatjx was Protestant 
dean of Norwich, where he died in 1724. He was an eminent 
scholar, remarkable for his indefatigable application to study. 
He was the author of a work of great celebrity, which may be 
well ranked among the introductions to the scripture. It is 
written in English, and has for title " The Old and New Testa- 
ment connected in the History of the Jews and neighbouring 
nations, from the declension of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah 
to the time of Christ. " Por sake of brevity it is usually referred 
to by the name of Prideaux's Connexion. This work has gone 
through numerous editions, which, for the most part, have been 
brought out in four volumes, octavo. A late edition has appeared 
in London, 1845, two volumes, octavo : to the first volume of it 
is prefixed an account of the rabbinic authorities, arranged alpha- 
betically by the professor of Hebrew in the King's college,' London, 
Eev. I)r. M'Caul. Of course it was not to be expected that a 
Protestant like Prideaux would defend the Catholic canon of 
scripture, or avoid the errors of his sect on all such questions. 
Here, unfortunately, party prejudices misled his judgment; but 
with this exception, he has displayed consummate ability and 



AXD OTHER WRITERS OX SCRIPTURE. 567 

learning in the composition of this work. It was early translated 
into French, and became as popular in that language as it was in 
English. A splendid French edition of it, which had been 
already preceded by several others, was printed at Paris in 
1742, six volumes, octavo. The French edition has this to 
recommend it, that it is furnished with dissertations by the learned 
Jesuit Tournemine, in which the Anti-Catholic errors of Prideaux 
are pointed out and refuted. Johx Henry Pareau was pro- 
fessor of the Oriental languages in the University of Utrecht. 
He was the author of several works in Latin, written with a 
view to illustrate the sacred scriptures. Of these the most 
learned is a work on the archaeology of the bible, entitled Anti- 
quitas Hebraica hreviter descripta, Utrecht, 1817, octavo. Pareau 
has distinguished himself among Protestant writers as an oppo- 
nent of the modern school of German neologists. There is one 
department of sacred literature in which the recent Protestant 
theologians of Germany have particularly laboured, viz.. in the 
elucidation of the sacred text by means of Lexicons. Of this 
class of writers the most distinguished are, Gesexius and Schlecs- 
xer ; the former as a Hebrew, the latter as a Greek lexico- 
grapher. An improved edition of Gesenius' Hebrew and Chaldaic 
Lexicon was published at Leipzig in 1833, octavo, with the 
following title, Lexicon manuale Hebraicum et Chaldaicum in veteris 
Testame?iti libros. Letting elaboravit, multtsque modis retractavii 
et auxit G. Gese?iius. It is to be observed, that Gesenius belongs 
to the neological school ; a fact which may be easily learned from 
his lexicon in several places. We see, therefore, that that lexicon 
is not a safe guide to the interpretation of the scripture. Schlei is-, 
xer composed a lexicon on the Septuagint version of the Old 
Testament, published at Leipzig in 1820-21, in five parts or 
volumes, octavo. But his most famous work, as a lexicographer, 
is written on the New Testament. The fourth and best edition 
of it was printed at Leipzig in 1819, two thick volumes, octavo. 
It has for title, Novum lexicon Grceco-latinum in Novum Testamen- 
tum concessit et variis observationibus philologicis illustravit, T. F. 
Schleusner. It is almost unnecessary to observe, that Schleusner 
is not a safe guide to the meaning of the sacred text. We may 
add, as a general observation, which will apply to many other 
works of this kind, besides the lexicons of Gesenius and Schleus- 
ner, that the most unfit introduction to the meaning of the sacn d 
text, is a lexicon written by one, who, with a preconceived and 
false system of Hermeneutics, endeavours to adapt his lexicon to 
that system. Herbert Marsh, lately Protestant bishop of 
Peterborough, has acquired great fame among Protestants as a 
biblical scholar. His best known work is the translation of 



568 



THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, 



Michaelis, already mentioned. Among his original works, per- 
haps the most remarkable is his Lectures on the criticism and in- 
terpretation of the bible, of which a new edition was printed 
in 1842, London, octavo. Of course he is a very unsafe guide 
upon such subjects. Even many of his co-religionists receive his 
doctrines with suspicion, on account of his lax theological notions. 
Jeremiah Jones was an English dissenting minister. He died 
in 1724. He was the author of a well known English work on 
the Canon of the New Testament, in three volumes, octavo. A 
large proportion of this work is occupied with the examination 
of all those spurious writings which have at any time claimed 
to be considered a part of the New Testament. A new edition 
of these volumes was printed at the Clarendon press, Oxford, in 
1827. We could not, in the present section, omit to notice an 
English octavo volume, written by the late Protestant bishop 
of Limerick, John J ebb. It is entitled Sacred Literature ; and 
its object is to point out the poetical element in the composition 
of the New Testament. In pronouncing on the character of the 
sacred poetry, the author adopts the principles laid down by 
Lowth. In applying these principles to the New Testament, 
Jebb has investigated, with extraordinary care and attention, the 
poetical parallelism which pervades that part of the sacred 
volume ; and although his conclusions may sometimes appear 
more fanciful than solid, and his exegetical views will be some- 
times erroneous, there is no doubt but he has expended much 
labour, and in many instances exhibited learning and ingenuity, 
in analyzing the structure of the sacred text. Thomas Habtwfll 
Horne is the name of the author of that Intro duct ioyi to ths 
critical study and knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, in four large 
volumes, octavo, which is so well known in these countries. 
This work has gone through several editions : the latest that has 
come in our way is the seventh, London, 1834. I am not aware 
that this differs materially from the succeeding editions. To say 
that this work contains a vast deal of matter of one kind or 
another is to enunciate a truism, and, at the same time, to pay 
the highest compliment to the author which we can afford to 
pay him. We do not intend to speak of the value of the extracts 
in themselves which Mr. Horne has heaped together from so 
many sources ; but we speak of his own authorship in the work, 
and we say that he neither deserves praise for the order in which 
he has arranged these extracts, nor for the display of ability or 
learning, much less of anything that could be called theological 
knowledge, in that series of running observations of his own, 
v hieh form the framework of these extracts. He has endeavoured, 
however, to redeem the want of these qualities with his readers, 



AND OTHER WRITERS ON SCRIPTrRE. 569 

by professing himself a firm believer in the most Anti-Catholic 
views which the most fanatical Protestant commentator on 
scripture has ever advanced. Some, perhaps, may be inclined to 
imagine that we would not be so sparing of our praises on this 
author were it not for the asperity of his language in reference 
to the Catholic Church. But, if such persons would read the 
observations of Dr. Davidson, in his Biblical Criticism, p. 382, 
they would lay aside this opinion. It is true that we have some- 
times, in the composition of this work, profited by the extracts 
which Home has collected. We consider, however, that any 
advantage of that kind has cost us dearly enough, having gone 
to the expense of purchasing two copies of this clumsy compila- 
tion. Dr. Samuel Davidson, formerly professor of biblical 
literature in the Royal Academical Institution, Belfast, and now 
I believe professor of biblical literature, ecclesiastical history, 
and Oriental languages in the Lancashire Independent College, 
Manchester, is the author of a volume on biblical criticism, and 
another on sacred hermeneutics, which, no doubt, have been well 
received by Protestants. We have no wish to detract from the 
real merits of Dr. Davidson ; but we must say that the soundness 
of his judgment is by no means proportionate to his learning ; 
and his frame of mind is so thoroughly Protestant that, whatever 
may be his literary qualifications for the task which he has 
undertaken, he has misapplied them all in endeavouring to sustain 
positions, respecting the scripture and its interpretation, which 
are as much opposed to common sense as they are to the most 
ordinary degree of respect for the authorised teachers of the 
Christian Church. The following is a sample of the way in 
which this independent professor speaks of the Holy Fathers in 
general : — "Their superstition, credulity, and folly, were noto- 
rious. Monkish notions and mystical pietism formed an essential 
part of their religious creed. Not only did they believe, but 
sanction, the working of miracles." — Davidson's Hermenexdics, 
p. 161. This quotation speaks volumes for its author. 
Kitto's .publications, the Pictorial Bible, the Pictorial History 
of Palestine and the Jews, and the Cyclopaedia of Biblical 
Literature, embody a great deal of curious information on 
the archaeology of the bible. None of the Protestants has done 
so much for this department of study as Dr. Kitto has by 
bringing out these works. All other topics which are dis- 
cussed in these works are treated after the usual manner of 
other Protestant publications. To the list of Protestant authors 
already mentioned, we might add the the names of others, whose 
labours have been, for the most part, confined to translating or 
editing the works of our Catholic writers : such as, for example, 



570 



CONCLUSION. 



aTasch, who lias given an edition (with a continuation) of a part 
of the Bibliotlieca Sacra of Le Long ; and Taylok, who edited 
the English translation (which had been made before his time) 
of Calniet's Dictionary of the Bible. 



C03TCLTJSIOK 



Having now brought our work, such as it is, to a close, we cannot 
finally take leave of the Catholic reader without again soliciting 
his special attention to the fact that it is only in the Catholic 
Church that the Eible has been always and uniformly treated 
with respect. There only has no opinion been tolerated deroga- 
tory to the dignity of the inspired Word. There only has 
criticism been kept within proper limits, and interpretation 
guarded against those absurd and profane and monstrous conceits 
which the principle of private judgment, applied to the exposi- 
tion of scripture, has produced. On the other hand, the church, 
whilst guarding against the abuse of the scripture, has always 
invited human learning to put forth all its powers to avail itself 
of recent discoveries and the progress of science, for the purpose 
of illustrating the sacred word ; provided only that it paid due 
respect to that body of apostolic doctrine which the church has 
been commissioned ever to guard and teach. And nobly has 
this call of the church been responded to in every age, as the 
names of those illustrious men, whom we have mentioned, testify. 
This harmony between the scripture and the church — this fixing 
of the proper limits of human learning — and this calling forth of 
all the powers of that learning within its proper sphere — these 
things so clearly recommend themselves to our reason, that 
we see at once that the bible is in its proper place in the 
Catholic Church — in other words, the word of God is at home 
in the church, which is the house of God. Everywhere else 
his sacred word is a stranger ; and it receives the treatment of 
a stranger. It is thrust into the hands of thoughtless children 
to meet with the usual fate of ordinary school-books. On account 
of this want of mutual acquaintance between the bible and those 
outside of the Catholic Church, the word of peace becomes among 
them the occasion of quarrels and dissensions : they can neither 
agree about its general character nor about the meaning of its 
particular contents. And yet — wonderful infatuation ! — be- 
cause the Catholic church will not act as they do — because it 
will not treat the word of God as a stranger in its own house — 



coNCLrsiox. 



571 



therefore, do these people, whilst calling themselves the friends 
of the scripture, cry out incessantly for the overthrow of that 
church. And to procure that overthrow every art is resorted to. 
But all in vain. For, Christ, the founder of that church, is, 
above all others, the Wise Man to whom He Himself alludes : 
Who built His Souse upon a rock ; and the rain fell, and the 
floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that Home, 
and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock. — St. Matt., vii, 
24, 25. 



FINIS. 



GENERAL INDEX, 



A, the Codex Alexandrinus, 6, 

Aaron Ben Asher, 54. 

Abilene, district of, 267. 

Abulpharagius, 120. 

Accommodationes Scripturce, 193. 

Adam Clarke, 551. 

^Emilius Rcediger, 124. 

Affinity, prohibited degrees of, ac- 
cording to the Jewish Law, 474. 

Agriculture, state of, among the 
Hebrews, 405, kc. 

A Lapide (Cornelius), 4. 

Alber, 547, 562. 

Alcasar, 540. 

Alcuin, 5114, 525. 

Aldine text of the Septuagint ver- 
sicto, 100. 

Aldus Manutius, 100. 

Alford, edition of the Greek Testa- 
ment, 79. 

Allegorical sense of Scripture, 191. j 
Allegorizing Interpretations of 

Scripture, 194. 
Alexandria, city of, 254. 
Alexandrian printed text of the 

Septuagint version, 101. 
Alter, his edition of the Greek 

Testament, 76. 
Amalechites, the people so called, I 

262. 

Ambrose (St.), 507- 
Amelotte, translated the New Tes- 
tament into French, 143. 
Ammonian sections, 43. 
Ammonites, the people so called,262. 
Ammonius, 43, 

Anagogical sense of Scripture, 191. 
Analogy of Faith, what, 218. 
Ansel m, 519. 
Anti-figurists, who, 192. 



Anti-Libanus, mountain, 276. 
Antipatris, town of, 212. 
Antiquities of the Jews, Political 

293, &c; Sacred, 337 ; &c. ; 

Domestic, 391, &c. 
Arabia, 253; Desert of, 280. 
Arabic versions of the Scripture, 

123. 

Arabic version of the Samaritan 

Pentateuch, 90. 
Aram Beth Rohob, 250. 
Aram or Aramaaa, country of, 249. 
Aram Naharayim, 250. 
Archaeology of the Bible, 249, &c. 
Areopagus, an Athenian tribunal, 

312. 

Arias Montanus,his edition of Pag- 
ninus Latin version of the Scrip- 
ture, 129; he wrote on the Jew- 
ish antiquities, 556. 

Arigler, 562. 

Arimathea, city of, 269. 

Aristeas, his account of the Sep- 
tuagint version, 91. 

Aristobulus, his account of the Sep- 
tuagint version, 92. 

Ark of the Covenant, 339. 

Armenian version of the Scripture, 
126. 

Arminius, 553. 

Arms of the Hebrew soldiers, 33 i, 
defensive arms, ibid. ; offensive 
arms, 332. 

Arrianus, 199. 

Arts, state of the, among the He- 
brews, 415. 

Apocalypse, of dubious authority 
among Protestants, 33. 

Aquilla, his version of the Scrip- 
ture, 102. 



574 



GENEEAL IXDEX. 



Assyria, 250. 

Astarte or Ashtoreth, 386. 
Augustine (St.), 507- 
Auranitis, district of, 267. 
Azyms, feast of, 350. 
Azotus, town of, 269. 
Avayvwafxara or Lessons, division 
of the iNew Testament into, 44. 

B, the Codex Vaticanus, 69. 
Baal and Baalim, 385. 
Baalberith, 385. 
Babylon, city of, 252. 
Babylonia, country of, 252. 
Balsam, or Balm plant, 413. 
Banquets, how conducted among 

the Jews, 470. 
Bar radius, 528. 
Basan, mountains of, 278. 
Bashmunc dialect, 122. 
Bathansea, district of, 267- 
Baver, 186. 

Beards, worn long by the Jews, 457. 

Beating to death, punishment of, 32 1 

Beausobre and L'Enfatit, their 
French version of the New Tes- 
tament, 144. 

Becanus, 557. 

Beelen (John Theodore), 190. 
Beelzebub, 385. 
Beeiphegor, 385. 

Bel. an idol of the Babylonians, 386. 
Belgian versions of the Scripture, 
145. 

Beliarmine, 542, 555. 
Belus, river, 285. 

Bengel, 67 ; his edition of the Greek 

i estament, 74. 
Benjamin JNJartin, disapproves of 

making the Bible a school book, 

169. 

Bereans, mentioned in the Acts of 
the Apostles, 159. 

Bern ar din de Pequigny, 544. 

Bertharius, 525. 

Besor, torrent of, 285. 

Bethania, town of, 269. 

Bethlehem, town of, 270. 

Bethphage, village of, 270. 

Bethsaida, town of, 273. 

Beza, his editions of the Greek 
Testament, 73 ; his Latin ver- 
sion of the New Testament, 132, 
552. 



Biblical Criticism, elements of, 
102, &c. 

Biblical Hermeneuties, 182, &c. ; 

history of, ibid. 
Birch, his edition of the Gospels, 76. 
Bishop's Bible, 136. 
Blasphemy, laws against it, 315. 
Bloomfield, his edition of the Greek 

Testament, 78. 554. 
Boerner (C. F.), 559. 
Bohemian version of the Scripture, 

147. 

Bonfrerius, 536. 
Bossuet, 542. 

Bouhours, translated the New Tes- 
tament into French, 143. 

Boustropkedon, ancient and modern 
writing, 36. 

Breves, division of the Scripture 
into, 42. 

Bristow (Richard), 133. 

Bruccioli, his Italian version of the 
Bible, 144. 

Bruising in a mortar, punishment 
of, 322. 

Burning to death, punishment of 322. 

Butler (Charles), 561. 

Buxtorf, on the antiquity of the 
Hebrew vowel points, 59 ; his 
edition of the Hebrew Bible, 61. 

Byblus, 37. 

Byssus of the Vulgate, what it 
signifies, ^49. 

C, the Codex rescriptus Ephrenri, 70. 

Calamities to which the Holy Land 
was liable, 289. 

Calmet, 545. 
I Calvary, mount, 277* 
I Calvin, 552. 

Camels, frequently mentioned 
Scripture, 402. 

Cana, torrent of, 285. 

Cana, town of, 273. 

Canon of Scripture, 1, 2. Protes- 
tant Canon of Scripture, 2, 3. 
Proof of the Catholic Canon, 19. 
Testimony of the Eastern 
Churches in favour of our Canon, 
20, &c. Objections against it 
solved, 23, &c. 

Capharnaum, city of, 274. 

Capituia, division of the Scripture 
into, 42. 



GENERAL INDEX. 



575 



Cappel (L.), on the antiquity of 
the vowel points in the Hebrew 
Bibles, 59. 

Carmel, mountains of, '276. 

Carpzov, 566. 

Cassiodorus, 510. 

Cassiodorus de Reyna, his Spanish 
version of the Scripture, 146. 

Castalio's Latin version of the 
Scripture, 131 ; his French ver- 
sion, 144. 

Cedars of Libanus, 281. 

Cerethi and Phelethi, 329. 

Csesarea of Palestine, city of, 274. 

Csesarea Philippi, town of, 272. 

Chaldaic paraphrases, 80. 

Chaldea, where situated, 253. 

Challoner's edition of the Douay 
Bible, 133. 

Chanaan, land of, 259. 

Chapters, divisions of the Scrip- 
ture into, 42. 

Cherubim of the ancient Sanctuary, 
339. 

Children, education of, how con- 
ducted among the Hebrews ; 
how they were to inherit, ac- 
cording to the law of Moses, 480. 

Christian Druthmar, 515. 

Cison, torrent of, 285. 

Clement of Alexandria, 506. 

Circumcision, 478. 

Clement VIII, his edition of the 
Latin Vulgate, 109. 

Codex, whence called, 37. 

Codex rescriptus or palimpsestus, 
what, 128. 

Commentary on the Bible, what it 
ought to be, 239. 

Commentators on the Scripture, 
504, &c. 

Commerce, state of, among the 

Hebrews, 435, &c. 
Complutensian Polyglot, 60-72. 
Concordance of the Bible, what, 

209. 

Consanguinity, prohibited degrees 

of, among the Jews, 474. 
Contarini, 533. 

Contest in the race, allusions to it 
in the New Testament, 496, &c. 

Copts, the people so called, 121. 

Coptic versions of the scripture, 
121. 



Corbin, translated the Scripture 
into French, 143. 

Corozain, town of, 273. 

Cosin, on the deuterocanonical 
books of the Old Testament, 28. 

Council of Toledo, 32. 

Courts of judicature among the He- 
brews, 310, &c. 

Coverdale's English Bible, 134. 

Crellius, 554. 

Critici Sacri, 548. 

Criticism of the Old Testament, 171. 

Criticism of the New Testament, 
177. 

Crucifixion, dreadful tortures in- 
flicted by, 322. 
Cyril (St.), of Alexandria, 509, 

D, the Codex Bezce, 70. 

D, the Codex Claromantanus, 71. 

Dagon, 387. 

Damascus, city of, 275. 

Dan, town of, 272. 

Daniel Bomberg's editions of the 

Hebrew Bible, 60. 
Dathe, his Latin translation of the 

Hebrew Bible, 132. 
Davidson (Samuel), 569. 
Dead Sea, 282. 

Dead, treatment of the, among the 
Hebrews, 49S, &c. 

Debtors, laws respecting them, 3 1 6. 

Decapitation, punishment of, 320. 

Decapolis, district of, 267- 

Dedication, the feast of, 355. 

Delta (the), a part of Egypt, 254. 

De Lyra (Nicholas), 522. 

Demetrius Phalerius, 91. 

Demoniacal possession, 433. 

De Sacy (Le Maistre), his French 
translation of the Bible, 143. 

Deuterocanonical books of Scrip- 
ture, 3. 

Dietemberger, translated the Bible 

into German, 142. 
Dichotomy, punishment of, 321. 
Diodati, his French version of the 

Bible, 144; his Italian versicfn, 146. 
Diodorus Siculus, 199. 
Dionysius Carthusianus, 524. 
Distinction, marks of, occurring in 

the Scripture, 40. 
Divination, laws against it, 315; 

various kinds of it, 38L 



576 GENERAL 

Divisions of the Scripture, 40. 
Division of the Commandments, 24 1 , 
&c. 

Divorce, how regulated by the law 
of Moses, 477. 

Doederlein and Meisner, their edi- 
tion of the Hebrew Bible, 64. 

Dogmatical laws of the interpreta- 
tion of Scripture, 214. 

Domestic Society among the He- 
brews, 471, &c. 

Douay version of the Old Testa- 
ment, 132. 

Dress of the Hebrews, 448. 

Dromedaries, 403. 

Drowning, punishment of, 321. 

Drusius, 548. 

Duclot (Joseph Francis), 562. 
Du Hamel, 543, 556. 
Du Pin, 543, 555. 

E, the Codex Basileus, 71. 
E, the Codex Sangermanensis, 71. 
E, the Codex Laudianus, 71. 
Earthquakes, of Palestine, 289. 
Earrings of the Jews, 459. 
Eating, manner of, among the Jews, 

467, &c. 
Eckius, 142. 

Edmund Burke, his description of 

the Bible, 168. 
Edomites, the people so called, 263. 
Egyptian versions of the Scripture, 
. 121, &c. 
Egypt, 253. 

Eichhorn's svstem of Hermenentics, 
224. 

Elders, their office, 294. 

Elias, why not called Elijah, 138. 

Eliseus, why not called Alisha, 138. 

Elymais, where situated, 252. 

Elzevir editions of the Greek Tes- 
tament, 73. 

Emims, who, 262. 

Emmaus, village of, 270. 

Encampments, as described in the 
Scripture, 330. 

Engaddi, desert of, 280. 

English Protestant authorized ver- 
sion of the Scripture, 134, &c. 

English versions of the Scripture, 
134, &c. 

Ennom, valley of, 279. 

Ephod, of the High Priest, 360. 



INDEX. 

Ephraim, forest of, 281. 
Ephrem (St.), 510. 
Ephrem, city of, 270. 
Epiphanius (St.), his account of the 

Septuagint version, 93 ; see also 

512. 

Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, 

occasion of, 212. 
Episcopius, 553. 

Erasmus, his editions of the Greek 
Testament, 72; his Latin version 
of the New Testament, 130; see 
also 521. 

Escol, torrent of, 285. 

Esdrelon, plain of, 278. 

Espencoeus, 535. 

Espousals, how conducted among 

the Hebrews, 474. 
Essenes, 389. 
Estius, 539. 

Ethiopian version of the Scripture, 
125. 

Ethiopian, 125. 

Eusebius, 512. 

Eusebian Canons (the), 43. 

Euthymius Zigabenus, 519. 

Excommunication, its character 
among the Jews, 324. 

Expiation, great day of, 353. 

Exposing to wild beasts, punish- 
ment of, 321. 

Faber Stapulensis, 142, 524. 
Fabricy (Gabriel), 559. 
Falsely prophesying, laws against 
it, 315. 

Fell, his edition of the Greek Tes- 
tament, 73. 

Fertility of the soil of the Holy 
Laud, 287. 

Fifth, sixth, and seventh ancient 
Greek versions, 103, 104. 

Figtrees of Palestine, 412. 

Figured Syriac version of the Scrip- 
ture, 119. 

Firstborn, its consecration to God, 
370. 

First-fruits, 371. 
Flaminius Nobilius, 106. 
Food, Jewish method of prepar- 
ing it, 463, &c. ; how seasoned 466. 

Forerius, 527. 

Frassen, his division of the Com- 
mandments, 248. 



GENERAL IXDEX. 



577 



French versions of the Scripture, 
142, &c. 

Furniture of the Hebrew dwellings, 
397. 

Gagnoeus, 527. 

Galaad, district of, 266 ; moun- 
tains of, 278. 

Galilee, province of, 266. 

Galileans, a Jewish sect so called, 
391. 

Gallican Psaltery, 117. 

Games and amusements to which 

allusion is made in the Scripture, 

493, &c. 

Gardens, culture of, among the 

Hebrews, 41 1. 
Gaulonitis, district of, 267. 
Gaza, city of, 270. 
Gehenna, 279.- 
Gelboe, mountains of, 277. 
Genesareth, Lake of, 282. 
Geneva Bible, 135. 
Geography (historical) of the Holy 

Land, 249, &c. 
Geography, (Physical) of the Holy 

Land, 276, &c. 
German Protestant views on the 

inspiration of Scripture, 17. 
German versions of the Scripture, 

141. 
Gerson, 523. 
Gesenius, 567- 
Gessen, land of, 254. 
Girdle of the Jews, 451. 
Glaire, 564. 
Glassius, 564. 
Glossa inter linearis, 519. 
Glossa or dinar ia, 516. 
Godeau, his French Testament, 143. 
Goldhagen, 559. 
Gomar, 552. 

Gothic version of the Scripture, 

127. 
Grabe, 101. 

Grain, kinds of, sown bv the Jews, 
408. 

Greek MSS. of the New Testa- 
ment, 65 ; families or recensions 
of MSS., 67, &c. 

Greek Testament, printed editions 
of, 72, &c. 

Greek text of the New Testament, 
present state of it. 79. 



Greek version of Scripture, pre- 
served in St. Mark's library at 
Venice, 104. 

Gregory Bar-Hebrseus, 120. 

Gregory (St.) the Great, 511. 

Griesbach, his edition of the Greek 
Testament, 75, 77. 

Grotius, 548. 

Guyard des Moulins, his French 
version of the Bible, 142. 

Habitations, or dwellings of the 
Hebrews, 391, &c. 

Hammon, 187. 

Hammond, 549. 

JTophtoroth, what, 49. 

Harclean Syriac version, 120. 

Hareth, forest of, 281. 

Head-dress of the Jews, 454. 

Hebrew armies, how raised, 329. 

Hebrew Bible, printed editions of, 
60. I 

Hebrew, derivation of the name, 
293, note. 

Hebrew manuscripts, 52; synagogue 
rolls, ibid.; MS. for the use of 
private individuals, 53; MSS. of 
the Spanish, French, Italian, and 
German Jews, 53. 

Hebrew, quiescent letters, 57- 

Hebrew texr, present state of, 47. 

Hebrew vowel points, when in- 
vented, 54. 

Hellenistic biblical, 198. 

Hellenist Jews, 97. 

Hendrickz, his Belgian version of 
the New Testament, 145. 

Hengstenberg, 37, 256. 

Herodian, 199. 

Herodians, 390. 

Hesychius, his edition of the Sep- 

tuagint version, 100. 
High places mentioned in Scripture, 

344. 

High Priest (the), of the Jews, 

359, &c. 
Hilary (St.), of Poitiers, 506. 
Historical context, what, 208. 
Holden, on extent of inspiration, 4. 
Holy Land, historical geography of 

the, 258. &c. ; physical geography 

of the, 276, &c. 
Holy of Holies, 339. 
Somoioteleuton, what, 171. 

2 p 



578 



GENERAL INDEX. 



Horeb, mountain, 278. 

Home (T.H.), his views 'on the 
extent to which the writers of 
Scripture were inspired, 16, his 
remarks on the Sixtine and Cle- 
mentine editions of the Vulgate, 
111, his Introduction to the Scrip- 
ture, 568. 

Houbigant, his edition of the He- 
brew Bible, 62, his Latin version, 
1 29, his introduction to the Scrip- 
ture, 558. 

Houses of the Hebrews, description 
of the, 39. 

Hug, 69, 561. 

Hugo (Cardinal) de Sancto Caro, 
divided the bible into chapters, 
44, his Concordance of the Bible, 
and commentaries, 520. 

Humphrey Hody, 565. 

Icelandic versions of the Scripture, 
147. 

Idolatrous worship, practices of, 
381. 

Idolatry, laws against it, 314; 
causes of it, 379 ; its progress, 
380. 

Idumsea, province of, 267. 

Imagery of the Bible, 203. 

Imprisonment, punishment of, 324. 

Ink, of the ancients, 39. 

Inspiration of Scripture, nature and 
extent of, 3, 4, &c. ; verbal in- 
spiration, 5 ; proof of inspiration, 
&c, 6, 7. 

Irish versions of the Scripture, 
148. 

Isidore (St.) of Pelusium, 510. 
Israel, the kingdom of, 265. 
Italian versions of the Scripture, 
145. 

Iturtea, district of, 267. 

Isidore (St.), of Seville, 513, 525. 

Jablonski, his edition of the Hebrew 
Bible, 61. 

Jaboc, torrent of, 285. 

Jacob Ben Naphtali, 54. 

Jahn, his edition of the Hebrew 
Bible, 64, his works on the in- 
troduction to the study of Scrip- 
ture, 560. 

James, Bellum papale, 110. 



James ( King), his Bible, 135. 
Jansenius Gandavemis, 532. 
Jansenius Yprensis, 535. 
Janssens, 561. 

Jebb, his Sacred Literature, 568. 

Jericho, city of, 271. 

Jerome (St.) 30; his translation of 
the Scripture, 107, &c. ; his com- 
mentaries on the Scripture, 507. 

Jerusalem, city of, 268. 

John Bernard de Rossi, 63. 

John Chrysostom (St.), 508. 

John Leusden, 61. 

John (St.) Damascen, 513. 

Jones (Jeremiah), 568. 

Joppe, city of, 271. 

Jordan, river, 284. 

Josaphat, valley of, 279. 

Joseph Athias, his editions of the 
Hebrew Bible, 61. 

Josephus, 35, 93, 199. 

Josue, his division of the Holy 
Land among the twelve tribes, 
263. 

Jubilee, year of the, 348. 
Juda, desert of, 280. 
Juda, the kingdom of, 265. 
Judaea, country of, 259 ; province of, 
266. 

Judges of the Jewish people, men- 
tioned in the Scripture, nature 
of their authority, 295. 

Judgment (the) a Jewish tribunal 
so called, 311. 

Julian (St.) 513. 

Junilius, 512. 

Junius and Tremellius, their Latin 
version of the Old Testament, 
131. 

Justinian, the Emperor, his consti- 
tution authorizing the Hellenist 
Jews to continue to use the Sep- 
tuagint version in their syna- 
gogues, 97- 

Justin Martyr (St.), his account of 
the Septuagint version, 93. 

K, the Codex Cyprianus,l\. 
Kant's system of Hermeneutics, 223. 
Karkaphensian recension of the 

Peschito-Syriac version of the 

Scripture, 121. 
Kennicott, his edition of the 

Hebrew Bible, 63. 



GENERAL INDEX. 



579 



Kenrick, 547. 

Kephalaia, division of the Scripture 
into, 42. 

Kings of the Jewish people, men- 
tioned in the Scripture, nature of 
their authority, 298, how inaugu- 
rated, 299 ; their table, how 
supplied, 300 ; their duties, 301 ; 
their rights, 302 ; their revenues, 
whence derived, 303. 

Kitto, 569. 

Kiyyoun, 387. 

Kuinoel, 550. 

Lachmann, 78. 
Lamy, 541,555. 
Lanfranc, 517. 

Latin (modern), versions of the 

Scripture, 129, &c. 
Latin Vulgate version, 105, &c. ; 

history of, ibid. ; character of, 

lll,&c. 

Lead ore, powder of, used for orna- 
menting the eyelids, 457. 

Le Clerc, his French version of the 
New Testament, 144 ; his com- 
mentaries on the Scripture, 549. 

Legal proceedings among the 
Hebrews, manner of conducting, 
312. 6 

Legal purification, nature of, 369. 

Le Long, 558. 

Leo Juda's Bible, 130. 

Leopoldo Sebastiani, his Latin 
version of the New Testament, 
130. 

Leprosy, 431. 

Levites, their duties, 357. 

Lewis de Biei, his edition of the 
Hebrew Bible, 62. 

Lewis de Dieu, 548. 

Lewis Vives, 93. 

Libanus, mountain, 276. 

Liber, whence called, 37- 

Lingard, his edition of Ward's 
Errata of the Protestant Bible, 
135. 

Lippoman, 532. 

Locusts, account of their depreda- 
tions in Palestine, 290. 

Logical context, what, 202. 

London Folyglott, 73. 

London, Protestant bishop of,on the 
Inspiration of Scripture, 7. 



Looking-glasses of ancient Hebrews 

460. 
Lorinus, 541 . 
Lots, feast of, 354. 
Lowth, 566. 
Lucas Brugensis, 538. 
Lucian (St.), his edition of the Sep- 

tuagint version, 100. 
Lucinius, 108. 

Ludolph Kuster, his edition of the 

Greek Testament, 74. 
Luther, his translation of the Bible, 

141, his commentaries on the 

Scripture, 552. 
Lydda, town of, 271. 

Machabee, derivation of the name, 
307— note. 

MacKnight, his judgment on Beza's 
Latin version of the New Testa- 
ment, 132; his judgment on the 
English Protestant authorised 
version of the Scripture, 140; 
his commentaries, 551. 

Madianites, the people so called, 
261. 

Mai (Cardinal), 128. 
Maldonatus, 528. 

Malermi, his Italian version of the 
Scripture, 145. 

Malou, Bishop of Bruges, his work 
on the Reading of the Scriptures 
in the vulgar tongue, 155, 160. 

Manslaughter, laws respecting, 3)8. 

Manstealing, laws against it, 316. 

Marchesini, 526. 

Mariana, 538. 

Maronites, 118 — note. 

Marsh, his views on the interpre- 
tation of Scripture, 228, 567. 

Marcilius Ficinus,524. 

Martianay, 558. 

Martini, his Italian version of the 

Bible, 145, 546. 
Martin (Gregory), 133. 
Masch, 570. 
Masius, 534. 
Masora, what, 46. 
Matres lectionis, what, 173. 
Matthew Henry, 550. 
Matthew Parker, 135. 
Matthcei, his edition of the Greek 

Testament, 75. 
Mayer (Gregory), 560. 



580 



GEXEBAL IXDEX. 



Maximus (St.), 513. 
Meats, forbidden to the Hebrews, 
462. 

Media, where situated, 252. 

Memphis, city of, 254. 

Melchites, 121. 

Memphitic dialect, 122. 

Menochius, 531. 

Merom, lake of, 282. 

Michaelis (John David), 564. 

Michaelis (John Henry), his edition 
of the Hebrew Bible, 62. 

Migne (Abbe), 564. 

Mill, his edition of the Greek Testa- 
ment, 74. 

Ministers of the Hebrew 7 Kings, 
303, &c. 

Mirificam edition of the Greek Tes- 
tament, 72. 

Moabites, the people so called, 262. 

Modern versions of the Scripture, 
129, &c. 

Molina, on the spiritual sense of the 

Scripture, 193. 
Moloch, 386. 

Money, kinds of, mentioned in the 
Scripture, 442, &c. 

Mons, New Testament of, 143. 

Monsperger (Joseph Julius), 559. 

Months, names of the, among the 
Hebrews, 428. 

Moralia (T. M.), 564. 

Moria, mount, 277. 

Morinus, 557. 

Moses, of Marden, 119. 

Moses, why not called Mosheh, 138. 

Mountains of Palestine, 276, &e. 

Mourning, circumstances and 
duration of it, among the 
Jews, 502. 

Murder, laws against it, 318. 

Music of the Hebrews, 418; in- 
struments of, 419, &c. 

Mystical sense of Scripture, 220. 

Myth, what is understood by it, 
195. 

Mvthic interpretation of Scripture, 
224. 

Nabuchodonosor, nature of his 
punishment, recorded in Scrip- 
ture, 432. 

Nairn, town of, 274. 

Naplouse, city of, 272. 



Nary (Cornelius), his English 
Translation of the New Testa- 
ment, 134. 

Natalis Alexander, 544, 556. 

Navigation, state of, among the 
Hebrews, 446. 

Nazareth, town of, 273. 

Nazarites, their obligations, 363. 

Nebo, mountain, 278. 

New Exegesis, or Rationalistic 
Systems of Hermeneutics, 222, 
&c. 

New Year, feast of the, 349. 
New moons (the), days kept sacred 

among the Jews, 349. 
Nicetas, 517. 
I Nile, the river so called, 254. 
• Nineve, city of, 250. 
Nolan, 68. 

Notes, or Scholia on the Scripture, 
what, 239. 

Nomadic life of -the ancient He- 
brews, description of the, 399, 
&c. 

Nuptials, how celebrated among 
the Hebrews, 475. 

Oaths, 372. 
Odo, 525. 
CEcumenius, 516. 

Offerings prescribed in punishment 

of transgressions, 325. 
Officers of the Hebrew armies, 

330. 

Olivetan's French bible, 144. 

Olive trees of Palestine, 410. 

Olives, Mount of, 277. 

Olympiodorus, 515. 

Origen, his Hexapla, Tetrapla, 
Octapla, and Enneapla, 98 ; au- 
thor of Commentaries on the 
Scripture, 506. 

Original languages of the Scrip- 
ture, 34. 

Ovens used by the Jews, 464. 

Palm tree (the), a symbol of Pa- 
lestine, 414. 
Palestine. 259. 
Pamphilus (St.), 512. 
Paneas, town of, 272. 
Pantcenus (St.), 505. 
Papyrus, 37- 

Parable, nature of the, 206. 



GEXEEAL ixdex. 



Parallelism, a criterion of the sense 
of Scripture, 208; the distin- 
guishing feature of the Hebrew 
poetry, 418. 

Paraphrase of Scripture, what, 238. 

Parashioth, what, 42. 

Parchment, when introduced as a 
writing material, 38. 

Pareau, 567. 

Parents, disrespect towards them 

severely punished by the laws of 

Moses, 315. 
Parentheses, their connexion with 

the context, 207. 
Pasch, festival of the, 349. 
Paternal authority, very extensive 

according to the law of Moses, 

480.^ 
Patrizi, 564. 
Paulus Burgensis, 522. 
Paulus, a doctor and professor of 

theology, 227. 
Paul Fagius, 114. 
Pentecost, festival of, 351, 
Peraea, province and district of, 

266. 

Pereira (Antonio), his Portuguese 

version of the Scripture, 147. 
Pererius, 535. 
Perrone, Father, 11. 
Persia, 252. 

Persian versions of the Scripture, 
126. 

Perjury, laws against it, 315. 
Peschito- Syriac version of the 

Scripture, 1 17- 
Peter Waldensis translated the 

Scripture into French, 142. 
Pezron, 542. 
Pharisees, 388. 

Philistines, the people so called, 
261. 

Philoxenian Syriac version, 120. 
Philo, 93, 199, 
Phoenicia, province of, 252. 
Pierius, 512. 

Pietists, their system of inter- 
pretation of the Scripture, 226. 
Pineda, 540. 

Piscator, his translation of the 

Bible into German, 141. 
Pistachio tree, 414. 
Pius IV, constitution of, Dominici 

grey is, 156, 



Plague (the), in Palestine, 289. 
Ploughing, mode of, among the 

Hebrews, 406. 
Poetry, of the Hebrews, 417. 
Polish versions of the Scripture, 

147. 

Polite usages of the Hebrews, 485, 
&c. 

Polybius, 199. 
Polygamy, 472. 

Pomegranate trees of Palestine, 
413. 

Poole's Synopsis, 549. 

Portuguese versions of the Scrip- 
ture, 147- 

Polvglot editions of the Bible, 
128. 

Precipitation, punishment of, 321. 
Presents, custom of sending, fre- 
quent in the East, 457. 
Prideaux, 566. 

Priests of the ancient law, their 

duties, 358. 
Primasius, 512. 
Procopius, 51 1. 

Propitiatory (the), or Mercv-seat, 
339. 

Prophets, character of the, 365. 
Proselytes, Jewish, 355 ; of the 

gate, 356, of justice, ibid. 
Protocanonical books of Scripture, 

1, 2. 

Psalms, divisions of the, 40. 
Psalms of the Latin Vulgate, 107. 
Psychological context, what, 202. 
Ptolemais, city of, 274. 
Ptolemy, son of Lagus, 91. 
Ptolemy, Philadelphus, 91. 
Publicans mentioned in the Gospel, 

their character, 328. 
Pugilistic contest, allusion to it in 

the New Testament, 497. 
Punctuation of the Bible, 45. 
Punishments mentioned in the 

Scripture, 320, &c. 
Purim, feast of, 354. 

Quarantania, mount, 277. 
Quesnel, 144. 

Rabanus Maurus, 515. 
Rain, early, and latter, 287. 
Rama, town of, 271. 
Rational of judgment, 360. 



582 



GENERAL INDEX. 



Rationalistic mode of interpreting 

Scripture, 223. 
Reading of the Lord's Prayer in St. 

Matthew, 180. 
Reading of the Scriptures in the 

Vulgar tongue, 149. 
Rechabites, 364. 
Reland (Adrian), 565. 
Remigius of Auxerre, 516. 
Remphan, 387. 

Renaudot, on the canon of Scrip, 
ture, 22. 

Retaliation, nature of the law of, 
319. 

Rhemish version of the New Testa- 
ment, 132. 
Richard of St. Victor, 525. 
Ribera, 537. 

Roman Tribunals mentioned in the 

New Testament, 311. 
Roman, or Vatican, printed text of 

the Septuagint version, 100. 
Roman Psaltery, J 17- 
Rosenmuller, 549. 
Rose's State of Protestantism in 

Germany , 17, 33. 
Rufinus. his testimony in favour of 

our canon of Scripture, 29. 
Rupert, 519. 

Sa, 532. 

Sabbath, its origin, 346 ; how it 
was to be observed, 347. 

Sabbatical year, 348. 

Sacraments of the Old Law, 
378. 

Sacrifices of the ancient Law, 366, 
&c. 

Sadducees, 389. 
Sadolet, 533. 
Sahidic dialect, 122. 
Salmeron (Alphonsus), 536. 
Salutation, forms of, 491. 
Samaria, province of, 266 ; city of, 
271. 

Samaritan Pentateuch, 84. 

Samaritan version of the Penta- 
teuch, 89. 

Samaritans, their origin and his- 
tory, 84. 

Samson, why not called Shimshon, 
138. 

Sanchez (Gasper), 529. 
Sanctes Marmochini, 145. 



Sanctes Pagnirms, his Latin ver- 
sion of the Scripture, 129. 

Sanctuary, slaves of the, 356. 

Sandals of the Jews, 459. 

Sanhedrin, the great council of the 
Jews, 310. 

Schleusner, 567. 

Scholz, his edition of the Greek 

Testament, 77. 
Schultens (Albert), 200. 
Sciences, state of the, among the 

Hebrews, 421, &c. 
Scio de San Miguel, his Spanish 

version of the Scripture, 146. 
Sclavonic (modern) versions of the 

Scripture, 147. 
Scott (Thomas), 551. 
Scourging, punishment of, 323. 
Scribes, their office, 304. 
Scripture, various senses of, 

188. 

Seals or signets worn by the Jews, 
459. 

Sebastian Munster, his edition of 
the Hebrew Bible, 61 ; his Latin 
version, 130. 

Sedulius, two of the name, 517. 

Seemiller (Sebastian), 560. 

Semler, 186; his system of Herme- 
neutics, 224. 

Septuagint version, 90, &c. 

Sepulture, rites of, 499. 

Serarius, 537- 

Servetus, 553. 

Sherlock, 540. 

Shaw's Travels in Barbary and the 
Levant, 450. 

Sicera of the Vulgate, what it sig- 
nifies, 462. 

Sichem, city of, 272. 

Siderim, what, 42. 

Sidon, city of, 252. 

Simon (Richard), 557. 

Sinai, mountain, 278. 

Sion, mount, 217; why not called 
Zion, 137- 

Sixtus V, his edition of the Latin 
Vulgate, 109. 

Sixtus Senensis, 556. 

Slaves, condition of, among the 
Hebrews, 482, &c. ; condition of, 
among the other nations, 485. 

Slavonic, or old Russian version of 
the Scripture, 128. 



GENERAL INDEX, 583 



Social manners of the Hebrews, 

485, &c. 
Socinus (Faustus), 554 
Sodom, Lake of, 232. 
Solomon, why not called, Shelomoh, 

138. 

Son, privileges cf the firstborn, 478. 
Soncinates editions of the Hebrew 

bible, 60. 
Spanish versions of the Scripture, 

146. 

Speculum of St. Augustine, 108. 

Stephen (St.), 525. 

Stephens (Robert), his editions of 

the Hebrew Bible, 61 ; editions 

of the Greek Testament, 72 ; 

divided the New Testament into 

verses, 45. 
Stichoi or lines, division of some 

MSS. into, 44. 
Stoning, punishment of, 320. 
Strangers, kind treatment of, en- 
forced by the Mosaic law, 490. 
Stylus, used for writing, 36. 
Suniana, where situated, 252. 
Sycamore Fig tree, 402. 
Symmachus, his version of the 

Scripture, 103. 
Synagogue — worship of the Jews, 

order of the, 376. 
Synagogues, description of the, 345; 

officers of the, 362. 
Synopsis Criticorum, 549. 
Syriac versions of the Scriptures, 

117. 

Tabernacle, description of the, 337; 
furniture of the Tabernacle, 338. 

Tabernacles, feast of, 352. 

Tablets used for writing, 36. 

Talmud (the), of Jerusalem and of 
Babylon, 56. 

Tammouz, 386. 

Tanis, city of, 254. 

Targum of Onkelos, 80 ; of Jona- 
than Ben Uzziel, ibid. ; of Pseudo- 
Jonathan, 81 ; of Jerusalem, 82. 

Targums or Chaldaic paraphrases, 
80. 

Tatian, 43. 
Taylor, 570. 

Temperature of the Holy Land, 285. 
Temple of Solomon, 341 ; of Zoro- 
babel, ibid. ; of Herod, 342. 



Tents, 392. 

Teraphim, the idols so called, 387. 
Tetrarch, derivation of the name 

308; nature of his authority, 

ibid. 

Textus receptus of the Greek Testa- 
ment, 73. 

Thabor, mountain, 277. 

Thebes, city of, 254. 

Theatres, mentioned in the New 
Testament, 494. 

Theft, laws against, 316. 

Theocracy, why this name is used 
to designate the ancient govern- 
ment of the Jews, 294. 

Theodotion, his version of the 
Scripture, 102. 

Theodoret, 509. 

Theophylact, 517. 

Therapeutse, 389. 

Thomas (St.) Aquinas, 518. 

Threshing out corn, mode of, among 
the Hebrews, 407- 

Tiberias, city of, 273. 

Tichonius, 513. 

Time, divisions of, among the He- 
brews, 424, &c. 

Tindal's translation of the Scrip- 
ture, 134. 

Tiriuus, 529. 

Tischendorf, 78. 

Tithes, in the ancient Law, 372. 

Titloi, division of the Scripture 
into, 42. 

Toelner, 186. 

Toletus, 536. 

Tombs of the Jews, 509. 

Topheth, 279, 387. 

Tostatus, 523. 

Trachonitis, district of, 267- 

Trent, Council of, its decree res- 
pecting the Latin Vulgate, 111. 

Tribute, which was paid towards 
the support of the Temple, 327. 

Triplex Expositio, 545. 

Tropological sense of Scripture, 191. 

Tunic of the Jews, 450. 

Turpentine tree, 414. 

Tyre, city of, 252. 

Ulenberg, his German version of 

the Scripture, 142. 
Unshod, house of the, 476. 
Unterkircher, 563. 



584 GENERA 

Upper Garments of the Jews, 452. 
Urim and Thumrnim, 361, &c. 
Usury, laws regarding, 317. 
Usus loquendi, a criterion of the 
sense of Scripture, 196. 

Valla (Laurentius), 520. 

Vander Hooght's Hebrew Bible, 62. 

Van Winghe, his Belgian version 

of the Scripture, 145. 
Vatablus, 527. 

Vatican, or Roman, printed text of 
the Septuagint version, 100. 

Veil, worn by the Jewish women, 
456. 

Veith, on the Hebrew vowel points, 

59 ; see also 562. 
Venerable Bede, 132, 514. 
Verses, division of the Bible into, 

44. 

Version of Scripture, what it 

ought to be, 230. 
Versions of the Scripture, 80, &c. 

ancient versions, ibid. 
Vetus Italica version, 105. 
Victor, 512. 

Vienne, Council of, 185. 
Vineyards, 409. 
Vows, 373. 

Walafridus Strabo, 516. 
Walton, 73, 



INDEX. 

War-chariots, mentioned in the 
Scripture, 335. 

Ward's Errata of the Protestant 
Bible. 135. 

Weights and measures, mentioned 
in the Scripture, 438, &c 

Weitenauer, his Latin version of 
the Scripture, 130. 

Westminster Confession, on the 
inspiration and Canon of Scrip- 
ture, 8. 

Wetstein, his edition of the Greek 

Testament, 75. 
Whately, Protestant Archbishop of 

Dublin, censured, 160, 235. 
Wickliffe, 134. 

Wife suspected of adultery, Mosaic 
law respecting her, 476. 

Wind, the pestilential, 290. 

Wiseman (Cardinal), 62, 105, 108, 
563. 

Witham's English translation of 

the New Testament, !34. 
Worthington (Thomas), 133. 

Zaid, apart of Egypt, 254. 
Zealots, a Jewish sect so called, 
391. 

Zohar, book of, 59. 

Zohrab,his edition of the Armenian 

version of the Scripture, 127. 
Zomommims, who, 262. 



J. MOORE, Printer, 2, Cramptou Quay, Dublin. 



t 



I 



